Case Law Details
HCL Technologies Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Levy of penalty in this case is unsustainable because mere preferring a claim which is unacceptable to the Revenue does not ipso facto lead to levy of penalty. Here in this case, Form No. 56F duly signed by the Chartered Accountant justifies the plea of bona fide belief on the part of the assessee. It is not the allegation against the assessee that any material fact relating to the income had to be unearthed with any efforts of the Revenue. It is only on the basis of the material furnished by the assessee, claim of the assessee for benefit u/s. 10A of the Act in respect of 31 units as independent, was rejected. Every disallowance does not lead to penalty, and more particularly such disallowances in relation to the issues whichare debatable, in respect of which, the substantial questions of law are admitted by the Hon’ble High Court, are immune from penalty proceedings. With this view of the matter, we do not find any justification to sustain the penalty and consequently, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the same.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
Aggrieved by the order dated 6/4/2017 in appeal No. 101/16-17/CIT(A)-22, New Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”) in the case of M/s HCL Technologies Ltd (“the assessee”) confirming the penalty levied by the learned Assessing Officer in the order dated 30/03/2015, however, at a reduced amount, this appeal is preferred by the assessee.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
