Case Law Details
Netambit Value First Services (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Merely because assessee-company had claimed deduction of expenditure without deducting TDS on As it was not in dispute that payment of interest to bank/NBFC was genuine, it was not the case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Merely because assessee-company had claimed deduction of expenditure without deducting TDS on interest payment, which was not accepted by Revenue, by itself, would not attract the levy of penalty.
The A.O. did not initiate the penalty proceedings for concealment of income. Explanation-1 to Section 271(1)(c) would apply in the case of concealment of income and not in the case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, there is a contradictory findings given by the A.O. in the assessment order as well as in the penalty order. Merely because the assessee-company did not challenge the addition before Ld. CIT(A), is no ground to levy penalty against the assessee-company because it is well settled law that assessment and penalty proceedings are distinct and independent proceedings. It is not automatic in each and every case to levy penalty, if addition is sustained on merits. Considering the above discussion, we are of the view that it is not a fit case for levy of the penalty.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-6, Delhi, dated 05th January, 2016, for the ay 2011-2012, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
