The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. M/S.celetronix Power India Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.349 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus M/s.Celetronix Power India Private Limited ..Respondent. Mr.Arvind Pinto for the appellant.Mr.Sanjiv M Shah for the respondent. P.C. : CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 5[th] November 2012 1.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal. 2.The finding of fact recorded by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is that the assessee had disclosed all material facts relevant for the purpose of assessment and there was no concealment. In the present case, the assessee had claimed deduction under Section 80HHC by relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Shirke Construction Equipments Limited reported in 246 ITR 429 (Bom), which was the judgment prevailing on the date of filing of the return. Subsequent to the filing of the return, the aforesaid decision of this Court in the case of Shirke Construction Equipments Limited (supra) has been reversed by the Apex Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories Limited V/s. DCIT reported in (2004) 266 ITR 521 (S.C.) and accordingly disallowance has been made and penalty has been imposed. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has deleted the penalty on the ground that the additions made on account of disallowance was neither due to the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish accurate particulars nor on account of furnishing inaccurate particulars. We see no infirmity in the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3.The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S. Sanklecha, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)