Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Aerens Projects & Infrastructure (P) ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 20 December, 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH 'A
'A' : NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL,
G.D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV,
YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.
No.2952/Del/2013
Assessment Year : 2008-
2008-09
Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s Aerens Projects &
Income Tax, Infrastructure P.Ltd.,
Central Circle-
Circle-9, Block-
Block-C, Gold Souk,
Jhandewalan,
Jhandewalan, Sushant Lok, Phase-
Phase-1,
New Delhi. Gurgaon.
PAN : AADCA8496Q.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Smt. Anuradha Misra, CIT-DR.
Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Jain, AR.
ORDER
PER G.D.AGRAWAL, G.D.AGRAWAL, VP :
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-IV, New Delhi dated 20th December, 2012 for the AY 2008-09.
2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:-
"1. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the penalty of Rs.4,58,515/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2 ITA-2952/D/2013
2. (a) The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts.
(b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal."
3. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. In our opinion, the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt.Ltd. - [2010] 322 ITR 158 (SC), wherein their Lordships held as under:-
"Where there is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its return are found to be incorrect or erroneous or false there is no question of inviting the penalty under section 271(1)(c). A mere making of a claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such a claim made in the return cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars."
4. In the assessee's case, the assessee made the claim of expenses part of which is not allowed by the Assessing Officer. As per the Hon'ble Apex Court, a mere making of a claim which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. It is not the case of the Revenue that the details supplied by the assessee in its return of income were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Therefore, merely because part of the expenses claimed by the assessee is 3 ITA-2952/D/2013 disallowed, the assessee cannot be saddled with the liability of penalty under Section 271(1)(c). On the facts of the assessee's case, in our view, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts Pvt.Ltd. (supra) is applicable. Respectfully following the same, we find no infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A). The same is sustained and the Revenue's appeal is dismissed.
5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Decision pronounced in the open Court on 13th December, 2013.
Sd/- Sd/-
(RAJPAL YADAV)
YADAV) (G.D.AGRAWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE
VICE PRESIDENT
Dated : 13.12.2013
VK.
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant : Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-
Circle-9, Jhandewalan, New Delhi.
2. Respondent : M/s Aerens Projects & Infrastructure P.Ltd., Block-
Block-C, Gold Souk, Sushant Lok, Phase-
Phase-1, Gurgaon.
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar