2019 (5) TMI 1375

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4,34,011/- 2010-11 3,49,339/- 2011-12 3,49,339/- 2012-13 47,372/- 2. The learned counsel of the assessee has challenged the confirmation of the penalty on both the grounds - lack of the specification of charge for the levy of penalty and also on merits of levy of penalty. 3. Brief facts of the case leading to the levy of penalty are that assessee is the builder and developer. In the assessment completed under section 153A of the Act, the assessing officer found that the assessee has adjusted the interest earned on fixed deposit with the interest paid and has adjusted the resultant amount in the work in progress. The assessing officer was of the opinion that in view of the honourable apex court decision in the cas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ounsel of the assessee submitted that assessee has made a claim. If the same is not accepted it cannot be taken as reason to initiate penalty proceedings. He submitted that assessee's accounting of interest is not ex facie bad. In this regard he placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Karnal Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd. 118 Taxman 489. He further submitted that in the assessment proceeding itself assessee has accepted the assessing officers addition. Hence learned counsel submitted that assessee should not be visited with the rigours of penalty. In this regard learned Counsel of the assessee placed reliance upon following case laws :- • Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (2010) 189 Taxman 332 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nacceptable the same cannot lead to levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). In this regard, Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of Reliance Petroproducts (supra) supports the case of the assessee. In this case it was held by Hon'ble Apex Court that if the Assessing Officer does not accept a claim of the assessee that will not ipso facto be a reason to initiate penalty proceedings. 10. Furthermore, we note that assessee has agreed for the said treatment in the assessment proceedings. It is also the plea of the assessee that the said accounting treatment can be said to be an inadvertent error. In these circumstances also assessee deserves to succeed on the touchstone of Hon'ble Apex court decision in the case of Price Waterhouse....