Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

18. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relying on the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) submitted that since the claim of the assessee was not allowable under the law, the Ld. CIT (A) has rightly confirmed the penalty levied on account of disallowance made u/s 80G of the Act. Hence, there is no merit in the contention of the assessee.

19. We have perused the relevant material including the cases relied upon by the Ld. Counsel in the light of the rival submissions of the parties. We notice that in the case of ACIT vs. AH Wheelers & Company Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Allahabad Bench of Tribunal has held that carry forward loss shown at wrong figure due to mistake of Tax consultant would not attract penalty u/s 271 (c) as the correct figure was available with the AO. Similarly, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Campro Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble High Court held that if the reason given for wrong filing is not a device to cover and ulterior purpose, the mistake made by the Chartered Accountant can be treated as human error, therefore the same cannot be held to be the concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income so as to attract penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act.