2015 (12) TMI 186

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 1,13,46,367/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 ii. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent assessee company is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of software development. The return for the assessment year 2001-02 was filed on 31.10.2001 disclosing net loss of Rs. 2,89,52,667/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.01.2004 at a taxable loss of Rs. 74,323/-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee relied on the order CIT(A) and prayed that the same may be confirmed. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the penalty of Rs. 1,13,46,367/- levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. A perusal of the penalty order shows that the penalty has been levied for alleged offence of concealing the particular of income but we find that the Assessing Officer had not given a finding in the penalty order as to how and in what manner the respondent assessee company had furnished inaccurate particulars of income resulting in addition to the returned income except making the bald charge against the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the facts relating to the same and material to the income were not disclosed by him. Thus, apart from his explanation being not bona fide, it should have been found as of fact that he has not disclosed all the facts which was material to the computation of his income. The explanation, having regard to the decisions of the court, must be preceded by a finding as to how and in what manner he furnished the particulars of his income. It is beyond any doubt or dispute that for the said purpose the Income-tax Officer must arrive at a satisfaction in this behalf. (See CIT v. Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd. [2000] 246 ITR 568 (Delhi) and Diwan Enterprises v. CIT [2000] 246 ITR 571 (Delhi)." 6. Mere additions to the returned income woul....