2018 (12) 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

....ceed to decide the present appeal after hearing the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is contrary to law and to the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case, in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act of Rs. 37,96,070/- as against the additional income offered during the survey and admitted by filing revised return of income. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeal) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case in holding that the claim as revenue expenditure was on oversight a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eld the assessee to have furnished inaccurate particulars of income within meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the Act and has committed default in view of provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act and explanation thereof. 6. The CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied by Assessing Officer observing that Explanation-1 of section cannot be invoked in respect of deciding the issue of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, against which the Revenue is in appeal. 7. On perusal of record and after hearing the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue, it transpires that penalty proceedings are to be initiated for non satisfaction of one of the two limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The requirement of law is that the assessee is ....