TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 901
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....too Jain, Advocate (Through Video Conferencing) For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Priyesh Kasliwal, Advocate & Mr. C.M. Sharma, Advocate for Mr. P.K. Kasliwal, Advocate ORDER Heard on admission. Though, Mr. Priyesh Kasliwal, Advocate for Mr. P.K. Kasliwal, Advocate enters appearance on behalf of the respondent, as the case is listed for admission, at this stage, the respondent cannot be allowed to o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Rs.36.00 crores and the respective depreciation at 80% was claimed on the entire addition to Wind Mill without reducing the amount of subsidy of Rs. 36.00 crores from the cost claimed on the basis of various decisions of the Coordinate Benches of the ITAT and the Hon'ble High Court, the assessee has neither concealed any particulars of income nor it had filed any inaccurate particulars of inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubsidy of Rs.36.00 crores received by the assessee from Ministry of Textile, Government of India was not reduced from the cost of the windmill, as according to the assessee, the Proviso to Explanation 10 of Section 43(1) was not applicable in the case of assessee placing reliance on M/s Lotus Integrated Taxpark Ltd. vs DCIT (supra). Although, in assessee's case on merits the Coordinate Bench has s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roviso to Explanation 10 of Section 43 (1) of the Act was found not applicable in the case of assessee, an inference has to be drawn that assessee had submitted inaccurate particulars, cannot be accepted. Irrespective of whether or not assessee is entitled to the benefit under proviso to Explanation 10 of Section 43(1) of the Act, in order to entail liability for penalty, there has to be satisfac....