2016 (6) TMI 209

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Act') dated 25.05.2012. 2. In this appeal, the solitary grievance of the assessee is against the action of the income-tax authorities in imposing penalty of Rs. 4,23,449/- under section 271(1)(c) of the Act . 3. In this context, the brief facts are that the appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act,1956 and is, inter-alia, engaged in the business of manufacture of diamond/gold jewellery. For the assessment year under consideration, it filed a return of income declaring a loss of Rs. 23,92,146/-, which was subject to scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act dated 24/11/2011, whereby the loss was assessed at Rs. 10,06,419/-. The difference between the reported and the assessed loss was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,62,12,047/-, but inadvertently failed to disallow a sum of Rs. 13,70,387/- being the exchange rate difference on repayment of foreign currency Term loan. Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that there was no malafide on the part of the assessee in making such a claim inasmuch as assessee is not benefitted at all from such claim as the net income was a figure of loss. Moreover, the loss has been carried forward and setoff against profits in the subsequent year and only on the balance of such profits assessee had claimed deduction under section 10AA of the Act in the subsequent year. It was, therefore, contended that it was a mere inadvertent mistake and such an error does not give rise to penalty under ....