TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lty, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that for the assessment year 2006-07, the assessee filed the return of income on 30/11/2006 showing a total income of Rs. 12, 48, 000/-and during the course of assessment proceedings, learned Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 1, 19, 56, 652/-on account of default Revenue expenditure, administrative expenses, business promotion and depreciation. The claim of the assessee that the default Revenue expenses to the tune of Rs. 1, 00, 43, 676/-debited in P&L Account was denied and such an expenditure was inadmissible but the learned Assessing Officer allowed depreciation on such account by treating it as capital expenditure. Proceedings under section 271(1)( c ) of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry claim preferred by the assessee towards deferred Revenue expenditure itself is something false, and such false statement even after having the expert opinion amounts to furnishing of inaccurate particulars and therefore the order of the Ld. CIT(A) does not warrant any interference in this appeal; whereas it is the contention on behalf of the assessee that there is no concealment of any income or expenditure even according to the Revenue, but it is only the difference of opinion between the assessee and the learned Assessing Officer that resulted in the addition. It is further submitted that by treating the expense as capital in nature, as a matter of fact, learned Assessing Officer allowed depreciation at 10%, whereas according to the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessment year 2006-07 a sum of Rs. 1, 00, 43, 676/-was debited in the P & L account under the head and "deferred Revenue expenses". 6. Learned Assessing Officer however did not agree with this treatment of the expense by the assessee and while treating it as capital expenses and while disallowing the entire Revenue expenses, allowed depreciation at 10%. It is therefore, clear that it's not the case of the Revenue that the assessee concealed any income or expenditure but they have only claimed the expense as deferred Revenue expenses whereas according to the learned Assessing Officer, it has to be treated as capital expenses while allowing the depreciation. According to the assessee they have allowed 50% expenses for the 1st block ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Delhi held that law does not bar or prohibit an assessee for making a claim, which he believes may be accepted or is plausible; that when such a claim is made during the course of regular or scrutiny assessment, liberal view is required to be taken as necessarily the claim is bound to be carefully scrutinized both on facts and in law; that full probe and appraisal is natural and normal; that threat of penalty cannot become a gag and/or haunt an assessee for making a claim which may be erroneous or wrong, when it is made during the course of the assessment proceedings; that normally, penalty proceedings in such cases should not be initiated unless there are valid or good grounds to show that factual concealment has been made or inaccurat....