2017 (8) TMI 184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8-09, claiming following substantial questions of law:- (i) "That the Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh has erred in law and on facts in cancelling the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) to the tune of Rs. 29,80,390/- in respect of addition of Rs. 96,45,276/- on account of sundry balances written off which was not suo motto offered for taxation even though the same was taken into consideration for claiming deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the assessee. (ii) That the assessee had clear cut intention to conceal the income and defraud the payment of due taxes? (iii) That the order of the Hon'ble ITAT is perverse. 2. A few facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy involved, as narrated in appeal, may be noticed.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. It was observed by the CIT(A) that the allegation of deliberate and mala fide intention on the part of the assessee to make a wrongful claim was far fetched. There were no circumstantial factors to suggest that the claim was intentional as the assessee company's case being in the higher income group generally gets selected for scrutiny year after year. Thus, it cannot be said that the assessee was hoping to get away with such blatantly wrongful claim. The mere fact that the mistake had been pointed out by the Assessing Officer, during the assessment cannot mean that the claim itself at the time of filing of return was with the intention of deceiving the revenue. With these observations, the CIT(A) vide ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the assessee company on which deduction under Section 80IC of the Act had been claimed. The assessee explained that due to inadvertent mistake, the same was omitted to be added back in the computation of its income. Thus, the Tribunal concurred with the findings recorded by the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. The relevant findings recorded by the Tribunal in this regard read thus:- "We have considered rival submissions and material available on record. It is not in dispute that the amount of sundry balances written off was already added back in the computation of income of Baddi Unit on which deduction under Section 80IC of the Act have been claimed. The assessee explained that due to inadvertent mistake, same was....