2022 (6) TMI 120

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed of Rs. 2,86,97,054/- levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act passed by the learned Assessing Officer on 30th March, 2019 was deleted. 2. The learned Assessing Officer has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "(i) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 2,86,97,054/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating that the fact that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of its income for the instant Assessment Year thereby concealing its true income. (ii) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs. 2,86,97,054/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ochin Unit of Rs. 85,98,116/-. The assessee preferred the appeal before the learned CIT(A), who confirmed the disallowance under Section 10A of the Act of Rs. 5,92,02,308/- instead of claim of Rs. 13,69,95,563/-. He also confirmed the addition of Rs. 85,98,116/- on option premium loss allocated to SEZ unit. Based on this, the penalty proceedings originally initiated was put into action. The assessee submitted a letter dated 11th March, 2019 stating that disallowance under Section 10A of the Act was made on ad hoc basis and there is no concealment of income. Meanwhile, the order of learned CIT(A) in quantum proceedings was challenged before the coordinate Bench in ITA no. 4548/Mum/2017. This appeal was decided as per the order dated 14th Jun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oes not stand and directed to be deleted." 4. Thus, penalty was deleted by the learned CIT(A). 5. The learned Assessing Officer is aggrieved with that of the order is in appeal. 6. Supporting the order of the learned Assessing Officer, the Departmental Representative submitted that the decision of the ITAT has been challenged by the Revenue before the Hon'ble High court with respect to the deduction under Section 10AA of the Act. Further, with respect to the second disallowance on allocation of loss premium, it was submitted that ITAT has set aside the order to the file of the learned Assessing Officer for deciding afresh and therefore, the penalty could not have been deleted on the above sum. 7. The learned Authorized Representativ....