2025 (3) TMI 2045

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeals of the assessee are identical and issues are common hence, we proceed to pass a common order. For brevity, we shall take up the appeal in ITA No. 2079/Chny/2024 for A.Y 2019-20 as lead case. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for A.Y 2018-19 are as under: "1) The Impugned Order is unfair, excessive, unwarranted and liable to be quashed. 2) The Assessing Officer and the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not entertaining and considering the bona fide explanation on the part of the Appellant for not rectifying the mistake made in filing the return of income, until it was pointed out by the Department in the Assessment Proceeding. 3) Without prejudice, the Assessing Officer and the Learned Com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4. The assessee has filed return of income on 29.10.2018 by declaring total income of Rs. 4,63,430/-. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) on 28.04.2020. The assessee has claimed deduction of Rs. 36,55,963/- u/s. 80IA of the Act in the return of income on generating power by wind mills. The A.O has disallowed the claim of deduction, as the initial year of assessment in Form-10CCB filled by the assessee was mentioned as 27.03.2007 and therefore 10 consecutive years from the initial year has already elapsed. The A.O has also penalty u/s. 270A of the Act for misreporting of the income on the above disallowances as assessee has accepted the disallowances. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntation or suppression of facts in respect claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act. The LD AR has explained that the claim was made on the basis of report in Form-10CCB certified by the C.A, wherein all material facts including initial year of generating power was correctly stated as 2006-07 and therefore there was no misrepresentation or suppression of facts .The LD AR has also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, in support of his contention. 7.1 It is settled principal of law that penalty proceedings are separate and distinct from assessment proceedings and merely because a claim has been disallowed and assessee has accepted the disallowances in itself would not attract p....