2021 (1) TMI 292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) dated 27.03.2014 framed by ACIT-3(1), Bhopal. 2. Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal :- "on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in: 1) holding that there is no finding on record that any details supplied by the appellant in its return of income for the year under consideration ore found to be incorrect or false and therefore, there is no question of levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when w.e.f. 01.04.2007, the assessee was not eligible fat deduction uls80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 despite the same the assessee has been making incorrect claim of deduction u/s 80P of the IT Act thus furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at Jabalpur has admitted the appeal of the appellant on these issues as substantial question of law for the A.Y. 2007-08 and 2008-09. Appellant has also relied on Hon'ble I.T.A.T., Indore Bench order in ITA No. 502 to 505/Ind/2014 for A.Y. 2005-06 to 2008-09 dated 01.12.2015 in the case of ACIT-3(1), Bhopal Vs. M/s R.K. Gupta Contractors & Engineers Pvt. Ltd Bhopal, wherein the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. has stated that "we are taking a consistent view that when there is an admission of High Court regarding penalty, the penalty cannot be imposed". Therefore, respectfully following the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Bhopal and the decision of the Hon'ble I.T.A.T., Indore, the penalty order u/s 271....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... facts has came up before this Tribunal in assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2011-12 vide ITA No.597/Ind/2015 and revenue's appeal was dismissed and the finding of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was confirmed by this Tribunal observing as follows:- "3. We have heard both the parties and also perused the relevant material placed on the record of the Tribunal, inter alia paper book filed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that there is no finding on record that any detailed supply by the appellant in its return of income are found to be incorrect or false and therefore, no question levying the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ities and hence, the assessee has made a bonafide legal claim and has not concealed or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the appeal against the order of the Tribunal which uphold disallowance for earlier years have been filed before Hon'ble High Court and for A.Y. 2011- 12. The I.T.A.T. has passed order u/s 158A of the Act, therefore, same has not attained finality and thus penalty cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further pointed out that even in the assessment order dated 13.12.2013 the AO himself has mentioned status of the assessee as deemed society under the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976 and thus, it is not a Cooperative Bank on which provisions of section 80P(4) of the Act applies. The Ld. AR fi....