2011 (10) TMI 636

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st the order dated 24.2.2010 of the CIT(A)-30, Mumbai confirming the penalty of Rs. 1,21,255 levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing officer for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. Briefly stated the material facts are like this. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has claimed PMS fees amounting to Rs. 55,10....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccurate particulars of income and finally levied minimum penalty of Rs. 1,21,255 being 100% of tax sought to be evaded. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without any success. 3. The assessee is not satisfied and is in further appeal before us. 4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered factual matrix of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and added that "such being the case, there would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act" and that "a mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding income of the assessee". It is also required to be noticed that impugned penalty is levied in respect of small disalloances and, th....