TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 889
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt, 'the Act) levying penalty of Rs.39,70,050/- for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:- "1. On the facts & circumstances of the case the order passed by Learned Assessing Officer u/s 271(l)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 & as affirmed by the Hon'ble CIT(A) is bad in law as the basic conditions for levy of penalty u/s 271(1) (c) are not satisfied. The appellant prays that penalty levied u/s 271(l)(c) may be deleted. 2. On the facts & circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer, while issuing original notice U/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1) (c) dated 22-12-2017 did not frame any specific charge against the appellant as to what is default committed by the appellant in trea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax Act, 1961. Same was confirmed by the honorable CIT(A).The appellant prays that the merely disallowance of a claim cannot tantamount to filing of inaccurate particulars of income. 6. On the facts & circumstances of the case, the Learned Assessing officer and the Learned CIT(A) failed to acknowledge the fact that amount disallowed in the year current year is otherwise allowable in the subsequent year. The appellant prays that since this expenditure is otherwise allowable under the Act & the appellant's claim is in accordance with the ICAI Guidance note read with relevant account standard rws 145(2) of the Act, the said claim cannot be characterized as "filing of inaccurate particulars & consequently penalty u/s 271(l)(c ) of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the guidance note issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (in short, ICAI). However, the Assessing Officer has not agreed with the submissions of the assessee and added the entire administrative and general expenses of Rs.1,78,87,946/- to the capital work in progress and also initiated penalty for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Thereafter, vide penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 28/06/2018, levied penalty of Rs.39,70,050/- for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 13/02/2020 upheld the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. 3. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the Ld.co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the specific 'Guidance Note on Accounting for Real Estate Transactions' issued by the ICAI. It was also submitted that assessee had submitted all the relevant details and supporting evidences before the Assessing Officer. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee had explained that the accounts of the assessee were duly audited and the audit report was placed as part of record from which it clearly demonstrates that assessee had recognized revenue from project on percentage of completion method following the guidance note issued by ICAI on real estate transactions. It is undisputed fact that genuineness of the expenditure were never doubted and question was only with the allowability of the said expenses. We have perused t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osts of hiring plant and equipment; (g) costs of design and technical assistance that is directly related to the project; (h) estimated costs of rectification and guarantee work, including expected warranty costs; and (i) claims from third parties. 2.4 The following costs should not be considered part of construction costs and development costs if they are material: (a) General administration costs; (b) selling costs; (c) research and development costs; (d) depreciation of idle plant and equipment; (e) cost of unconsumed or uninstalled material delivered at site: and (f) payments made to sub-contractors in advance of work performed." 6. Considering ....