DCIT Vs Nevales Networks Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)
No Concealment Where Impairment Already Disallowed, Service Tax Credit Properly Expensed & Advance Revenue Properly Accounted–ITAT Mumbai Upholds CIT(A)’s Deletion of 271(1)(c) Penalty;
Revenue appealed against CIT(A)’s deletion of penalty of ₹80.73 lakh levied u/s 271(1)(c) on three additions made in assessment—(i) impairment loss on fixed assets (₹1.66 crore), (ii) service tax receivable (₹18 lakh), & (iii) advance subscription revenue (₹63.91 lakh). The assessee had not filed a quantum appeal, but contested the penalty.
ITAT found that penalty was unwarranted on all three counts. For the impairment loss, the assessee had already suo-moto disallowed the entire amount in the return, & the AO wrongly added it again. Thus, there was no furnishing of inaccurate particulars.
For the service-tax receivable, CIT(A) had correctly noted that the amount represented input CENVAT credit relating to current-year expenses, written off upon business becoming non-viable-not a provision or false claim. This factual finding remained uncontroverted by Revenue.
For the alleged unaccounted revenue, ITAT affirmed that under mercantile accounting, subscription income relating to future periods was correctly shown as advance income, & AO had misunderstood the billing pattern.
Relying on judicial principles that penalty is not automatic, & that additions in assessment do not ipso facto establish concealment, the Tribunal held that the assessee had made full disclosures & no inaccurate particulars were furnished. CIT(A)’s reasoning was upheld in full.
