TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 1336
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r dated 27.12.2006. Penalty was imposed by DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act vide his order dated 31.07.2008 2. The only issue in this appeal of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied by AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings made addition of duty, cess, taxes and EPF amounting to Rs. 1,17,04,699/- for the reason that these payments have been made after due date in the relevant years. Accordingly, the AO made addition of following by disallowing the same u/s. 43B of the Act. "Add: amount disallowed u/s. 43B: Charged in P.L A/c But not paid within due date (annexure-6 of TAR) 1. Cess Duty Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e due date as specified in the relevant Act. However, the appellant was entitled to get credit of the same on payment basis. In view of the submission and case laws relied upon by the appellant, I am of the view that the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is not leviable in the instant case because the appellant had disclosed all the relevant facts. There was no mensrea to conceal or hide anything with the sole intention to evade or avoid tax liability. Otherwise also if the amount involved is disallowed in the year under consideration, in the subsequent year the same is to be allowed on payment basis following the provision of section 43B of the I.T. Act. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the A.O. is directed to delete the penalty le....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not being the case, there would be no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such claim made in the return cannot amount to the inaccurate particulars. It was tried to be suggested that section 14A of the Act specifically excluded the deductions in respect of the expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. It was further pointed out that the divi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In this behalf the observations of this court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu [2009} 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the court had found that the authorities below had found that there were some incorrect statements made in the return. However, the said transactions were reflected in the accounts of the assessee. This court, therefore, observed (page 251) : "So far as the question of penalty is concerned the items which were not included in the turnover were found incorporated in the appellant's account books. Where certain items which are not included in the turn....