Dy. CIT v. Hifunda Ltd. - Taxpublishers.in

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax PublishersI. T. A. No. 868/Kol/2011 2013 TaxPub(DT) 0802 (Kol-Trib) : (2013) 051 (II) ITCL 0582 : (2013) 022 ITR (Trib) 0488 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Penalty under section 271(1)(c)Concealment Disallowance of depreciation claim--Assessee claimed depreciation towards portal and e-commerce site. assessing officer disallowed the depreciation noting that it cannot be treated as fixed asset and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c). Commissioner (Appeals) observed that assessee had disclosed the material facts in its return of income in respect of the cost of the portal and e-commerce site and there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by assessee and therefore, deleted the penalty. Revenue appealed before Tribunal. *Held:* Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in deleting penalty as assessing officer had not made out any case of concealment of particulars of income rather it was a case of disallowance of expenditure on the basis that the portal and e-commerce site was not fixed asset. The expenses were genuine and not denied by assessing officer. There was no doubt that assessee had developed the portal and e-commerce site and no declaration was false. Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 271(1)(c) IN The ITAT, Kolkata 'B' BENCH P. K. Bansal, A.M. & Mahavir Singh, J.M. Dy. CIT v. Hifunda Ltd. I. T. A. No. 868/Kol/2011 A.Y. 2005-06 15 February, 2013 Appellant by : D. K. Rakshit Respondent by : Sanjay Bajoria, FCA ORDER 1. This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-VIII, Kolkata in Appeal No. 76/CIT(A)-VIII/ Kol/08-09 dated 28-1-2011. The assessment was framed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Kolkata under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessment year 2005-06, vide his order dated 11-12-2007. Penalty in dispute was also levied by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Kolkata, under section 271(1)(c) of the Act vide his order dated 27-6-2008. 2. The only issue in this appeal of the Revenue is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) deleting the penalty levied by the assessing officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on wrong claim made of depreciation. For this, the Revenue has raised following four grounds : SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax PublishersI. T. A. No. 868/Kol/2011
2013 TaxPub(DT) 0802 (Kol-Trib) : (2013) 051 (II) ITCL 0582 : (2013) 022 ITR (Trib) 0488

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Penalty under section 271(1)(c)Concealment Disallowance of depreciation claim--Assessee claimed depreciation towards portal and e-commerce site. assessing officer disallowed the depreciation noting that it cannot be treated as fixed asset and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c). Commissioner (Appeals) observed that assessee had disclosed the material facts in its return of income in respect of the cost of the portal and e-commerce site and there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by assessee and therefore, deleted the penalty. Revenue appealed before Tribunal. Held: Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in deleting penalty as assessing officer had not made out any case of concealment of particulars of income rather it was a case of disallowance of expenditure on the basis that the portal and e-commerce site was not fixed asset. The expenses were genuine and not denied by assessing officer. There was no doubt that assessee had developed the portal and e-commerce site and no declaration was false.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 271(1)(c)

IN The ITAT, Kolkata 'B' BENCH

P. K. Bansal, A.M. & Mahavir Singh, J.M.

Dy. CIT v. Hifunda Ltd.

I. T. A. No. 868/Kol/2011

A.Y. 2005-06

15 February, 2013

Appellant by : D. K. Rakshit

Respondent by : Sanjay Bajoria, FCA

ORDER

1. This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-VIII, Kolkata in Appeal No. 76/CIT(A)-VIII/ Kol/08-09 dated 28-1-2011. The assessment was framed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Kolkata under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessment year 2005-06, vide his order dated 11-12-2007. Penalty in dispute was also levied by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Kolkata, under section 271(1)(c) of the Act vide his order dated 27-6-2008.

2. The only issue in this appeal of the Revenue is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) deleting the penalty levied by the assessing officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on wrong claim made of depreciation. For this, the Revenue has raised following four grounds :