TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 1314
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....et metal parts as well as trading of electrical appliances. Assessee e-filed its return of income on 19-9-2008 declaring loss of ₹ 1,29,742/-.The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) vide order dated 18-10-2010 and the total income was determined at ₹ 9,97,459/- after making addition u/s. 43B and 40A(7) but before adjustment of brought forward losses. After the adjustment of brought forward loss to the extent of income, the total income was determined at Rs. Nil. It is on the aforesaid additions, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and therefore liable to penalty u/s. 271(1) (c). 3. During the course of assessment proceedings A.O. observed that assessee had claimed deducti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... identified and reported in tax audit report. The A.O. thus relying on the decision of Apex Court in the case of Dharmendra Processors & Ors. (306 ITR 277) and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Zoom Communications Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 510 held that the assessee had concealed its income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and accordingly levied penalty of ₹ 3,53,794/-. CIT (A) confirmed the penalty vide order dated 6-7-2012 by holding as under: "2.3. I have carefully considered the penalty order and the submission made by the appellant during the course of appellate proceedings. The penalty has been imposed as the addition of ₹ 3,25,566/- u/s. 43B and ₹ 8,53,748/- u/s. 40A (7) of the Act was m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case of the appellant clearly falls under Explanation 1(B) to section 271 which provides that if the person fails to prove that the explanation offered by him was bonafide and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of the total income have been disclosed by him. It is a known fact that the audit report in Form No.3CD is not uploaded in the e-return fully. Only the certain portions and important information of the audit report is uploaded in the e-return. The appellant did not upload the information related to unpaid bonus liability and gratuity which was to be provided in Part A -01 of the e-return. Therefore, it did not disclose the material facts related to computation of income on his own in the return of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad stopped production at its unit from 28-2-2010. In the year under appeal, the income determined after making the additions and after adjustment of brought forward losses was nil and no tax was payable by the assessee. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that there was no concealment of facts as the amount of bonus payable as on the last day of the financial year and the provision for gratuity was disclosed in the tax audit report and based on which the A.O. had made the disallowance. The non furnishing of details in part A-01 of the e-return was a clerical error and therefore cannot be considered to be with a malafide intention. It was further submitted that the disallowance made in the current year will be allowed in the subsequent year as pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Revenue by bringing any contrary material on record. 10. In the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), the issue was that though the provision towards payment of gratuity was not allowable, the assessee claimed a deduction in the return of income and was also allowed in assessment framed u/s. 143(3). Later on in the reassessment proceedings, the aforesaid provision was disallowed and added to the income. On this addition the A.O. levied penalty. In those circumstances the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the assessee had committed an inadvertent and bonafide error and had not intended to or attempted to either conceal its income or furnish inaccurate particulars and therefore upheld the order of Hon'ble Calcutta High Cou....