TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 490
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 27.04.2012 for assessment year 2009-10. Shri Sauarabh Kumar, Ld. Departmental Representative represented on behalf of Revenue and Shri V.N. Dubey, Ld. Advocate appeared on behalf of assessee. 2. In this appeal the Revenue has challenged the order of CIT(A) whereby the CIT(A) confirmed the order of AO imposing penalty on the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). 3. The facts and circumstances under which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was levied on the assessee by the Assessing Officer are that the assessee is a limited company and is engaged in the manufacturing business of potable alcohol. The assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 declaring total income at NIL. However, the assessee paid the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Act is a special provision for levy of Minimum Alternate Tax on Companies, inserted by Finance Act 2000 with effect from 1-4-2001. 2. Under clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Act, penalty for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is determined based on the "amount of tax sought to be evaded" which has been defined inter-alia, as the difference between the tax due on the income assessed and the tax which would have been chargeable had such total income been reduced by the amount of concealed income or income in respect of which inaccurate particulars had been filed. 3. In this context, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its judgment dated 26.8.2010 in ITA No.1420 of 2009 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....purpose of MAT, then the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, will depend on the nature of adjustment. 6. The above settled position is to be followed in respect of section 115JC of the Act also. 7. Accordingly, the Board hereby directs that no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground and appeals already filed, if any, on this issue before various Courts/Tribunals may be withdrawn/not pressed upon. This may be brought to the notice of all concerned." The ld. Counsel for the assessee also drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Limited in ITA No. 1420/2009 dated 26.08.2010 wherein the Hon'ble Court took a view that imposing of penalty u/s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come is reduced to a figure lower than the concealed income or even a minus figure. The court was of the opinion that 'the tax sought to be evaded' will mean the tax chargeable not as if it was the total income. Once, we apply this rationale to explanation 4 given by the Supreme Court, in the present case, it will be difficult to sustain the penalty proceedings. Reason is simple. No doubt, there was concealment but that had its repercussions only when the assessment was done under the normal procedure. The assessment as per the normal procedure was, however, not acted upon. On the contrary, it is the deemed income assessed under Section 115JB of the Act which has become the basis of assessment as it was higher of the two. Tax is thus paid o....