2017 (10) TMI 164

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-17 Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-17/IT-44/2010-11, dated 29-11-2011. The Assessment was framed by ITO Ward 8(2)(4), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2007-08-11 vide order dated 24-12-2009 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter 'the Act'). The penalty under dispute was levied by ITO Ward 8(2)(4) vide order dated 25-06-2010 under section 271(1)(c)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of the AO. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before Tribunal 4. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the assessee has claimed deduction under section 10B of the act on interest amount of loans and advances and AO brought to tax the excess claim of d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nds available on a temporary basis for fruitful purposes rather than keeping the funds idle. 5. We find from the facts of the case that and order of coordinate bench exactly on identical circumstance, the Tribunal in the case of M/s Siemens Information Systems Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 5143/Mum/2011 for AY 2002-03 vide order dated 18-05-2012 has deleted the penalty vide Para 3 which reads as under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot be said that the assessee could not have entertained a bona fide view about the eligibility of such interest income for the purposes of deduction under two provisions in the light of the above two orders passed by the Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal. Merely because the assessee's claim has not been accepted in quantum proceedings, cannot per se be a reason to impose or confirm penalty u/s. 2....