The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 4 v. M/S Bhagwati Banquets And Hotels Ltd ==========================================================

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADR/TAX APPEAL NO. 472 of 2018 ==========================================================THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4VersusM/S BHAGWATI BANQUETS AND HOTELS LTD========================================================== Appearance:MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHIandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA Date : 09/05/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1.The Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 13.11.2017 raising the following substantial question of law for our consideration; Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act ? 2.The issue pertains to penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which the Tribunal deleted making the following observations; “6. We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The assessee has furnished the details showing that payment of these service tax was made after the due date for filing the return of income. We observe that the necessary details were furnished in the tax audit report but the date of payment was left blank in the audit report by inadvertent mistake and the assessee has claimed deduction of the said amount in the succeeding assessment year 2008-09 in the revised return filed. Regarding brought forward unabsorbed losses / depreciation, the ld. Counsel has submitted that assessee has not furnished inaccurate particulars as both the returned losses and the assessed losses of earlier years were part of the assessment record. After considering the facts as above and the findings of the ld. CIT(A) we observe that it cannot be said that assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed income, therefore, we do not find any error in the decision of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.”Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.” Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is 3.In brief, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee had not given inaccurate particulars of the income and had filed revised Return to correct the inadvertent mistake. No question of law arises. Hence, the Tax Appeal is dismissed. (AKIL KURESHI, J) PRAVIN KARUNAN (B.N. KARIA, J)