Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Fluid Logic System Pvt. Ltd.,, ... vs The Acit, Circle 4, Ahmedabad on 24 March, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD "A" BENCH
(BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
& SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
ITA. No: 1761/AHD/2013
(Assessment Year: 2009-10)
Fluid Logic System Pvt. V/S ACIT Circle-4, Ahmedabad
Ltd. 11-12 Mahagujrat
Industrial Nagar, Sarkhej
Bavla Highway N.H-8,
Village-Moraiya,
Ahmedabad-382210
(Appellant) (Respondent)
PAN: AAACF3161A
Appellant by : None
Respondent by : Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R.
(आदे श)/ORDER
Date of hearing : 23 -03-2017
Date of Pronouncement : 24 -03-2017
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
1. This appeal by the Assessee is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)- VIII, Ahmedabad dated 23.04.2013 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10.
2 ITA No. 1761/Ahd/2013. A.Y. 2009-10
2. The sole grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 45,326/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act.
3. The roots for the levy of penalty lie in the assessment order dated 30.09.2011 made u/s. 143(3) of the Act.
4. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the A.O. noticed that the assessee has claimed bonus expenditure of Rs. 6,30,333/- and has shown the same as payable on 31.03.2009. On verification of payment of details, the A.O. found that the assessee had paid only an amount of Rs. 5,54,306/-. Therefore, the unpaid bonus of Rs. 75,694/- was disallowed u/s. 43B of the act.
5. Penal proceedings were separately initiated.
6. During the course of the penal proceedings, the assessee contended that though the auditors have qualified in the tax audit report regarding the provision for bonus at Rs. 6,30,333/- but since the same was not paid before the finalization of audit report, it was qualified by the auditors.
7. However, at the time of filing of the return, the unpaid bonus of Rs. 75,694/- was inadvertently not disallowed and added to the returned income. It was strongly contended that the omission was purely a clerical error and there is no willful concealment of any income or filing of inaccurate particulars.
3 ITA No. 1761/Ahd/2013. A.Y. 2009-10
8. This contention of the assessee did not find favour with the A.O. who concluded by levying a penalty of Rs. 45,326/-.
9. Aggrieved by this, the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success.
10.None appeared before us on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice; therefore, we decided to proceed ex parte. The ld. D.R. strongly relied upon the findings of the First Appellate Authority.
11.We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. It is true that the provision was at Rs. 6,30,333/- and it is equally true that the assessee had paid only an amount of Rs. 5,54,306/-. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the assessee realized its mistake of omission and immediately agreed for the addition of Rs. 75,694/- and did not prefer any appeal.
12.In our considered opinion, it appears to be a clerical error without any intention to conceal the particulars of income. Therefore, drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. 348 ITR 306, we do not find any merit in the levy of the impugned penalty. We, accordingly direct the A.O. to delete the penalty of Rs.45,326/-.
4 ITA No. 1761/Ahd/2013. A.Y. 2009-10
13.In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is accordingly allowed.
Order pronounced in Open Court on 24 - 03- 2017
Sd/- Sd/-
(RAJPAL YADAV) (N. K. BILLAIYA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER True Copy ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Ahmedabad: Dated 24/03/2017
Rajesh
Copy of the Order forwarded to:-
1. The Appellant.
2. The Respondent.
3. The CIT (Appeals) -
4. The CIT concerned.
5. The DR., ITAT, Ahmedabad.
6. Guard File.
By ORDER
Deputy/Asstt.Registrar
ITAT,Ahmedabad