TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to penalty of Rs. 1.24 crores (rounded off) imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT (appeals) both on quantum additions as well as on the penalty. The CIT (Appeals), while upholding the quantum additions, deleted the penalty making following observations: "4. I have carefully considered the facts of the case and submissions, written as well as oral as advanced by the A.R. of the appellant. It is seen that the appellant has furnished complete particulars regarding claim of deduction u/s. 80IA and the claim is debatable as there are differing judgements on netting interest. In the same way, there are differing judgements on the applicabili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rein it was held that there is no justification to levy penalty when the AO had not found particulars furnished by the assessee to be false and had not unearthed any material facts or particulars which assessee had not disclosed is squarely applicable to the facts of the appellant, as the particulars furnished by the appellant had not been found false by the AO. Further, explanation (1) below section 271(1)(c) is also not applicable to the facts of the appellant's case as it is not a case where the appellant failed to offer an explanation or the explanation offered by the appellant was found to be false by the AO or where the appellant failed to substantiate the explanation to be bona fide. In the case of the appellant, the appellant ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evy of the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). Before parting it is pertinent to mention here that in the appellant's own case penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c). Before parting, it is pertinent to mention here that in the appellant's own case penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) for AY 2003-04 was deleted by the CIT(Appeals) vide order dated 19/9/2008 and on appeal filed by the revenue, the ITAT had upheld the order of the CIT (A) vide the order dated 13/2/2009 in ITA No. 3902/AHD/2008 similar observations of the A.O that he was satisfied that the appellant has concealed the particulars of the income and/or furnished inaccurate particulars of its income. The Hon'ble ITAT in its appellate order dated 13.02.2009 has referred to decision of Gujarat High ....