2020 (4) TMI 484

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of learned CIT(A) dated 21.10.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2009-10. The issue raised is that learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs. 95,500/- levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts of the case are that asses....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee cannot be exonerated of its liability by claiming that it had filed an invalid revised return. 3. Against the levy of penalty by the Assessing Officer and its subsequent confirmation by the learned CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before us. 4. We have heard both the Counsel and perused the records. The learned counsel of the assessee submitted that assessee has suo moto filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndly be deleted. 6. Per Contra, the learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 7. Upon careful consideration, we find that assessee has filed a revised return before the detection or any query on the impugned subject by the revenue authorities. The assessee's claim of filing the revised return has been negatived on the ground that at the extant p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers (P.) Ltd. vs CIT, 348 ITR 306 (SC) had expounded that an inadvertent error cannot lead to rigours of penalty. Furthermore, a larger bench of the Honourable Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa, 83 ITR 26 (SC) had expounded that when the conduct of the ass....