Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle -2 (1), Pune V. M/s. ISMT Ltd, Pune

ITA 259/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7362 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P.I. PATWA
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 271(1)(c); 142(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.259/PUN/2019 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. M/s. ISMT Ltd., Sr. No. 199, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014 PAN : AAACJ9917A ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri P.I. Patwa Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 13-07-2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 14-07-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 31-10-2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2013-14. 2 ITA No.259/PUN/2019, A.Y. 2013-14 2. The only issue is to be decided is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in deleting the penalty imposed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. reported in 322 ITR 158 (SC) in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. We note that the assessee received industrial promotional subsidy which was credited to the capital account for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2013-14. The assessee claimed depreciation on the same. Further, we note that the assessee received subsidy of Rs.10,69,68,800/- during the year under consideration and claimed depreciation to an extent of Rs.4,20,94,167/-. It was explained to the AO in response to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act the assessee treated the said subsidy as capital receipt and the value thereof was deducted from the value of fixed assets for computing depreciation allowable under the Act and also admitted that the depreciation claimed would be disallowed. For which the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that where complete disclosure of facts and claim were made though not found acceptable was bonafide to conclude that no penalty be imposed. In the present case, admittedly, the assessee disclosed all the details in respect of subsidy and depreciation thereon and voluntarily admitted that Rs.4,20,94,167/- as may be disallowed. The AO disallowed the same. When all the details are on the record no penalty can be 3 ITA No.259/PUN/2019, A.Y. 2013-14 imposed for making incorrect claim, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and it is justified. 4. In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14 th July, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनाांक / Dated : 14 th July, 2022. रदव आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-12, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT-Central, Pune 5. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. //सत्यादपत प्रदत// True Copy// आिेशानुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ दनजी सदचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune