Addl/CIT, New Delhi V. M/s ONGC Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1552/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5363 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAMITA M BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: C S AGGARWAL SENIOR; NIDHI BANSAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Initiation of penalty proceedings; Difference of opinion; Change of opinion
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(3); 43; 48; 13; 22

Judgement Text

ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 1 OF 50 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: E: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 1552/DEL/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI. VS. M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD., 601, 6 TH FLOOR, KAILASH BUILDING, 26, K G MARG, NEW DELHI. PAN NO: AAACO1230F APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : MS. PRAMITA M. BISWAS, CIT(DR) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.S. AGGARWAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND MS. NIDHI BANSAL, C.A. ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM (A) THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 01.12.2016 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSION ER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-7, NEW DELHI, [IN SHORT, LD.CIT(A)] PERTAINING TO AS SESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. WHETHER HONBLE LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN DELE TING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) INCOME TAX ACT IGNORING THE CIRCUMSTA NCES AND FACT OF THE CASE THAT ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICU LARS OF ITS INCOME ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 2 OF 50 WHILE CLAIMING THE EXPENDITURE FOR WHICH NEITHER TH E LIABILITY HAS ARISEN NOR REVENUE HAS ACCRUED. 2. WHETHER CLAIMING THE EXPENDITURE FOR WHICH NEITH ER THE LIABILITY HAS ARISEN NOR REVENUE HAS ACCRUED DOES NOT CONSTRUES T O FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO BE ALLOWED TO ADD ANY FR ESH GROUND(S) OF APPEAL AND / OR DELETED OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUND(S) OF A PPEAL. (B) ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 04.12.2009 WAS PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (I.T. ACT, FOR SHORT), WHERE IN, INTERALIA, ADDITION OF RS. 149,31,02,715/- WAS MADE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ( AO, FOR SHORT) HELD THAT THIS AMOUNT HAD ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE ASSES SEE HAD NOT RECOGNIZED THIS REVENUE. THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION WAS, THAT PENDIN G THE SETTLEMENT OF EPC CONTRACT, THIS AMOUNT HAD NOT ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVE R, THE AO REJECTED THIS CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE THE AFORESAID A DDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 149,31,02,715/-. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATE D BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT IN RESPECT OF THE AFORESAID A DDITION OF RS. 149,31,02,715/-. THE AO, HOWEVER, HELD THAT IF IN APPEAL THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF TREATING REVENUES AS NON- TAXABLE ON ACCOUNT OF IT BEING UNCERTAIN IS ACCEPTE D, THEN THE PROVISION MADE BY ASSESSEE FOR THE ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE EXTENT O F RS. 102,60,80,000/- SHOULD BE DISALLOWED ON MATCHING PRINCIPLES AND ON THE SAME L OGIC AS FOR EXCLUSION OF REVENUES. IN EFFECT, THEREFORE, THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT I F THE AFORESAID REVENUE AMOUNTING TO RS. 149,31,02,715/- IS NOT HELD AS TAXABLE IN THE H ANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN, THE CORRESPONDING EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 102,60,80,0 00/- SHOULD BE DISALLOWED ON MATCHING PRINCIPLES. HOWEVER, THE AO DID NOT INITI ATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 3 OF 50 SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT IN RESPECT OF THE AFO RESAID ALTERNATE STAND OF THE AO THAT THE AFORESAID EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 102,60,80,0 00/- IS TO BE DISALLOWED IF THE AFORESAID REVENUE AMOUNTING TO RS. 149,31,02,715/- IS NOT TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL AGAINST AFORES AID ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 04.12.2009 BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). VIDE HIS APPELLAT E ORDER DATED 24.02.2014, LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE AFORESAID ADDITION OF RS. 149,31 ,02,715/-. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO AGREED WITH THE ALTERNATE STAND OF THE AO HOLD ING THAT IF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR TREATING REVENUES AS NON-TAXABLE ON ACCOUNT OF IT B EING UNCERTAIN IS ACCEPTED, THEN THE CORRESPONDING EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 102,60, 80,000/- SHOULD BE DISALLOWED ON MATCHING PRINCIPLES. THE DISPUTE TRAVELED TO INCOM E TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT). VIDE ORDER DATED 01.07.2019 OF CO-ORDI NATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI IN ASSESSEES CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IN ITA NOS.- 3150/DEL/2014 AND 3208/DEL/2014, THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WAS UPHELD O N THIS ISSUE. IN EFFECT THEREFORE, AS THINGS STANDS TODAY, PURSUANT TO THE AFORESAID O RDER DATED 01.07.2019 OF CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI, THE ADDITION AMOUNTI NG TO RS. 149,31,02,715/- STANDS DELETED, BUT THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR EXPENSES AMOU NTING TO RS. 102,60,80,000/- ALSO STANDS DISALLOWED. (B.1) THE AO HAS PASSED PENALTY ORDER DATED 30.03.2015 U NDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF INCOME TAX ACT, IN WHICH THE AO LEVIED PENALTY AMOU NTING TO RS. 34,53,78,528/- ON THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE AMOUNTING TO RS. 102,60, 80,000/-. BEFORE LEVYING THIS PENALTY, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AFORESAID ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 4 OF 50 PENALTY ORDER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT D ATED 30.03.2015 IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 5 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 6 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 7 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 8 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 9 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 10 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 11 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 12 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 13 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 14 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 15 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 16 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 17 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 18 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 19 OF 50 (B.1.1) AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A). VIDE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 01.12.2016, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED HE AFORESAID PENALTY AMOUNTING TO RS. 34,53,78,528/-, HOLDING AS UNDER: ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 20 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 21 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 22 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 23 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 24 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 25 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 26 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 27 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 28 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 29 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 30 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 31 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 32 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 33 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 34 OF 50 (B.2) THIS PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY REVENUE AGAI NST THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 01.12.2016 OF LD. CIT(A). DU RING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT) S YNOPSIS WAS FILED FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE SYNOP SIS IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 35 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 36 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 37 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 38 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 39 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 40 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 41 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 42 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 43 OF 50 ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 44 OF 50 (B.2.1) A COPY OF ORDER DATED 02.08.2019 OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V S. M/S SAHARA INDI A LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS IN ITA NO. 475/2019 AND OTHERS WAS ALSO FILED FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE, DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN ITAT, MENTION OF WH ICH WAS MADE IN THE AFORESAID SYNOPSIS. (C) AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LD. COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE) [LD. CIT(DR), FOR S HORT] PLACED RELIANCE ON THE AFORESAID PENALTY ORDER DATED 30.03.2015 OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, IN RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC QUERY FROM THE BENCH, SHE CONC EDED THAT THERE WAS FULL DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL FACTS BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, AND DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS; AND FURTHER, THAT NO RELEVANT INFORMAT ION OF FACT WAS WITHHELD BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE REVENUES AUTHORITIES DURING ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS. SHE ALSO CONCEDED THAT THE QUESTION WHETHER THE AFORESAID AM OUNT OF RS. 102,60,80,000/-, WOULD BE ALLOWABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, OR NOT; WAS HIGHLY DISPUTABLE AND, THAT DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW COULD LEGITIMATELY EX IST ON THE QUESTION OF ITS ALLOWABILITY. SHE ALSO DID NOT DISPUTE THE FACT THAT THE AO HAD F AILED TO SPECIFICALLY RECORD HIS SATISFACTION FOR INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF THE AFORESAID AMOUNT OF RS. 102,60,80,000/- IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 04.12.2009, ALTHOUGH THE AO HAD SPECIFICALLY RECORDED SUCH SATISFACTION IN RESPECT OF THE OTHER ADDITIONS (SUCH AS, ADDITION OF AFORESAID AMOUNT OF RS. 149,31,02,715/- ; DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIMS OF DEPRECIATION AMOUNTING TO RS. 204,57,99,264/- AND R S. 1,94,58,972/-; AND DISALLOWANCE OF PRE-ACQUISITION EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 112,51,25,851/-.) ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 45 OF 50 (C.1) ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. SENIOR ADVOCATE APPEARI NG FOR ASSESSEE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DA TED 01.12.2016 OF LD. CIT(A) AND PLACED RELIANCE ON THE AFORESAID SYNOPSIS [RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH HAVE BEEN REPRODUCED EARLIER IN FOREGOING PARAGRAPH (B.2) ] AND THE ORDER DATED 02.08.2019 OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PR. COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. M/S SAHARA INDIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. (SUPRA). (D) WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES PATIENTLY. WE HAVE PERUS ED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD CAREFULLY. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE PRECED ENTS MENTIONED IN THE RECORDS OR REFERRED TO IN THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN ITAT. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE AO HAD FAILED TO INITIATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT IN RESPECT OF THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES A MOUNTING TO RS. 102,60,80,000/- ALTHOUGH THE AO HAD SPECIFICALLY INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF OTHER ADDITIONS (SUCH AS, THE ADDITION OF AFORESAID AMOUN T OF RS. 149,31,02,715/-; DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIMS OF DEPRECIATION AMOUNTING TO RS. 204,57,99,264/- AND RS. 1,94,58,972/-; AND DISALLOWANCE OF PRE-ACQUISITION EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 112,51,25,851/-.) ON PERUSAL OF THE AFORESAID ORDER DATED 01.12.2016 OF THE LD. CIT(A); WE ALSO FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO F AILED TO INITIATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT, IN RESPECT OF THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 102,60,80,000/-. THUS, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER S ECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT WERE NEITHER INITIATED BY THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS NOR BY THE LD. CIT(A) DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 102,60,80,000/-. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT LEVIE D ANY PENALTY UNDER SECTION ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 46 OF 50 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT. WHEN THE AO SPECIFICALLY INITIATES PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN ADDITIONS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R, BUT DOES NOT RECORD INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDING IN RESPECT OF THE OTHER ADDITIONS; IT HAS TO BE INFERRED THAT THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF WHICH PEN ALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT INITIATED, WERE NOT INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR S UBSEQUENT ORDER IMPOSING PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF IT ACT. WHEN CERTAIN THING S ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED AND REMAINING THINGS ARE NOT INCLUDED THER EIN, IT HAS TO BE INFERRED THAT WHAT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED WAS NOT INT ENDED TO BE INCLUDED AT ALL. SCOPE OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF IT ACT CANNOT BE WIDENED LATER TO INCLUDE WITHIN ITS SCOPE SUCH ADDITIONS WH ICH WERE NOT SOUGHT TO BE COVERED WITHIN THE SCOPE OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) O F IT ACT, AT THE TIME WHEN PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AND ASSESSM ENT ORDER WAS PASSED. THE RETROSPECTIVE WIDENING OF THE SCOPE OF PENALTY, TO INCLUDE THOSE ITEMS FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF IT ACT WHICH WERE NOT INCLUDED FOR THIS PURPOSE AT THE TIME WHEN PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 27 1(1)(C) OF IT ACT WERE INITIATED AND ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED; AMOUNTS TO REVIEW AND CHANGE OF OPINION BY THE AO, TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE ASSES SEE; WHICH HAS NO AUTHORITY OF LAW . INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS BY THE AO IS VALI D ONLY IF THE AO IS SATISFIED IN THE COURSE OF ANY PROCEEDING S, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHED IN ACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. WHEN THIS SATISFACTION FOR INITIATION OF PENALTY PR OCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF IT ACT IS RECORDED BY THE AO IN ASSESS MENT ORDER IN RESPECT OF ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 47 OF 50 CERTAIN ADDITIONS DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ; AND NOT RECORDED IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN OTHER ADDITIONS; IT ACTS AS A BA R AGAINST LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF IT ACT IN RESPECT OF THOSE ADDITIONS I N RESPECT OF WHICH SUCH SATISFACTION WAS NOT RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER OR DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. (D.1) IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ISSUE REGARDING DISALLOWANCE AND CONSEQUENT ADDITION AMOUNTING TO AFORESAID RS. 102,60,80,000/- WAS HIGHLY DISPUTABLE ISSUE, ON WHICH TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS WERE LEGITIMATELY POSSIBL E. IT IS FURTHER NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THERE WAS FULL DISCLOSURE OF MATERIALS FACTS AND CI RCUMSTANCES BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURNS OF INCOME AND DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ; AND THAT NO RELEVANT INFORMATION OF FACT WAS WITHHELD BY THE ASSESSEE FR OM THE REVENUES AUTHORITIES DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. WHEN THERE WAS FULL DISCLOSURE OF MATERIALS FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCO ME AND DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS; THEN, ON A THE DISPUTABLE I SSUE OF QUANTUM ADDITION, ON WHICH TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS ARE LEGITIMA TELY POSSIBLE, OF WHICH THE ONE FAVOURABLE TO THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE; EVENTUALLY, THE ASSESSEE MAY OR MAY NOT SUCCEED IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS AND THE DISPUTABLE ISSUE, ON WHICH TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS WERE POSSIBLE, MAY EVENTUALLY BE DECIDED AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE BURDENED WITH PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT, IF ON A DISPUTABLE ISSUE OF QUANTUM ADDITION, ON WHICH TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS WERE LEGITIMATELY POSSIBLE, THE ASSESSEE DECIDED TO ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 48 OF 50 ADOPT THE VIEW WHICH WAS FAVOURABLE TO THE ASSESSEE ; IN A CASE IN WHICH ALL NECESSARY DETAILS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUP PORT OF THE CLAIM AND WHEN NO MATERIAL INACCURACIES WERE FOUND IN THESE D ETAILS, AND WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS NOT GUILTY OF SUPPRESSION OF ANY MATERI AL FACTS. IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, WHEN TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS ARE LEGITIMAT ELY POSSIBLE ON A DISPUTABLE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE; ONE OF WHICH IS FAVOURABLE TO THE ASSESSEE, THE MULTIPLICITY OF LEGITIMATE VIEWS AND DISPUTABILITY OF THE CLAIM HAS THE EFFECT OF EXCLUDING THE SCOPE OF PENALTY U/ S 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT IN RESPECT OF SUCH DISPUTABLE CLAIM EVEN IF THE DISPUT ABLE CLAIM IS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS; BECAUS E IN SUCH A CASE THE DISPUTABLE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE NEITHER AMOUN TS TO CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME NOR TO FURNISHING OF INACCU RATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME (D.2) THE LD. CIT(DR) HAS FAILED TO BRING ANY FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES LEGAL PROVISION OR JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS TO OUR ATTENTION TO PERSUADE US TO TAKE A VIEW DIFFERENT FROM THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE AFORESAID PENALTY AMOUNTING TO RS. 34,53,78,528/-, VIDE HIS IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER D ATED 01.12.2016. (D.3) IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT T HIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I.T. ACT AND WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 01.12.2016 OF THE LD. CIT(A). FOR THIS VIEW TAKEN BY US, WE TAKE SUPPORT FROM RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS (P) LTD. 322 IT R 158 (SC); DEVSONS (P) LTD. VS. CIT 329 ITR 483 (DEL.); HINDUSTAN COCA COLA MARKETI NG COMPANY PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 49 OF 50 (2019) 198 TTJ 0513 (DEL.) AND M/S PADMINI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS INDIA LTD . VS. DCIT (2019) 55 CCH 0420 DELTRIB. (E) IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/02/2020. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (ANADEE NATH M ISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUN TANT MEMBER DATED: 18/02/2020 POOJA/- COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA NO.- 1552/DEL/2017 M/S ONGC VIDESH LTD. PAGE 50 OF 50 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER