TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 865
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Ld. AO on account of Transfer pricing adjustment u/s 92CA(3) of the Act in the impugned penalty order passed on March 31, 2014 by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle 13(1), New Delhi ("Ld. AO"). 1.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in levying the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on the purported ground that the appellant had concealed particulars of its income as also furnished inaccurate particulars of income in respect of transfer pricing adjustment u/s 92CA(3) of the Act amounting to Rs. 94,16,785/-. 1.2 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the action....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om Communication Pvt. Ltd. (327 ITR 510)? 4. That the order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal." 4. From the aforesaid grounds, it is gathered that the grievance of the assessee relates to the sustenance of the penalty while the department is in appeal against the deletion of penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 5. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 02.11.2017 declaring Nil income. However, the assessment was framed by the AO at an income of Rs. 15,01,72,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tter to the ld. CIT(A) who deleted the penalty in respect of the ESOP expenses amounting to Rs. 21.28 crores by observing that it was a debatable legal issue. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Reliance Petroproducts (P.) Ltd. 189 Taxman 322. The ld. CIT(A) also directed the AO to recompute the penalty on account of additions made as per TP adjustment u/s 92CA(3) of the Act. 8. Now both the parties are in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset stated that the additions on the basis of which the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was levied by the AO was a subject matter of the cross appeals by the assessee as well as the department in ITA Nos. 2851 & 2752/Del/2013 resp....