CIT v. Devsons Logistics (P) Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N Mishra

…Raghav Export P Ltd. vs. CIT (Jurisdictional Delhi H.C.) >- 293 ITR 524, CIT vs. Caplin Point Laboratories Ltd. (Madras H.C.). >- 352 ITR 394, CIT vs. Amtek Auto Ltd. ( P &H High Court) >- 347 ITR 478, CIT vs. Lakhani Footwear Ltd. ( P &H High Court). >- 329 ITR 483, Devsons Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (Jurisdictional Delhi H.C.) >- 377 ITR 417, Principal CIT vs. G.K. Properties P Ltd. (T & AP) 23) It is well established that even if it is presumed that two views are possible, the assessee cannot be faulted for adopting a view favourable to him in filing in his return. In this connection reliance is placed on Hon'bi…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Rolls Royce Singapore Pte Ltd., New Delhi

In the result all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

…, in the case of CIT vs Globe Sales Corporation [2005] 196 CTR 187 (Del), that merely because certain additions/ adjustments are made in the assessment, it does not necessarily follow that penalty is to be levied. Similarly, in Devsons Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT [2010] 329 ITR 483 (Del), the Delhi High Court has held that merely because tax department does not concur with the legal stand adopted by the assessee, it will not be enough reason to hold that assessee is guilty of concealment of income or of furnishing inaccurate details. In view of these arguments, the ld. AR urged for dismissal of Revenue’s appeals. 7. We hav…

M/S. Snowhite Stores Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

…sly wrong and is not permissible, as it is a settled law that no penalty can be levied on a debatable point of law, as already clarified in many judgments and he made a reference to the following judicial pronouncements: • Devsons Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2010] 329 ITR 483 (Del) • CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd., 322 ITR 158 (SC) • CIT vs. Hindustan Computers Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 88 (All.) • Karan Raghav Exports P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 349 ITR 112 (Del) • CIT v. Mahavir Irrigation Pvt. Ltd., 347 ITR 241 (Del) 4.1 As regards the difference in stock valuation, the details submitted to the bank are valued at MRP for…

Mrs. Kamlesh Madan, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

…Hence the 5 penalty imposed on account of concealment of Income and furnishing inaccurate particular u/s 271(1)© is not justified and needs to be deleted. In support of his contention he relied upon the following case laws:- - Devsons Private Ltd. vs. CIT 329 ITR 483 - CIT vs. Deeksha Holdings Ltd. 196 Taxman 183 - CIT vs. Punjab Tyres (1986) 162 ITR 517 (MP) - CIT vs. Moti Lal & Co. (1990) 184 ITR 288 - ACIT vs. Smita Commercial & Investment Private Limited 90 Taxman 275 (Delhi); (2000) 246 ITR 216 (Del.) - ACIT vs. Smt. Geeta Devi (2001) 79 ITD 347 (Del.) 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the…

Shervani Hospitalities Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is disposed of

…ht that the amount of income-tax paid by the assessee as well as the amount claimed as deduction on account of certain equipment being written off could not be added back in the computation of income.” 22. In Devsons Logistics Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2010)329 ITR 483 (Del.), it has been held that when a question arises, which is debatable but the claim of the assessee is not finally accepted, penalty under Section 271(1)(c) should not be imposed. Divergent views on legal interpretation of tax provisions have been subject matter of plethora of decisions. It is not necessary that there should be uniformity…

Karan Raghav Exports Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is disposed of

…ain equipment being written off could not be added back in the computation of income.” 2012:DHC:1786-DB ITA 1152/2011 Page 16 of 16 17. Delhi High Court again in the case of Devsons P. Ltd. Vs. CIT [2010] 329 ITR 483 (Del) has held that when a legal issue arises for consideration, which is debatable but the claim made by the assessee is not accepted, there is no justification to invoke the penalty provisions under Section 271(1)(c). Divergent legal views on legal interpretation of a statute can take place, but it is not necessary that there should be un…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gautam R. Chadha

Appeals stand disposed of

…ion since the assessee offers the final income for taxation in the subsequent years. In this regard, he relies upon the judgments of Raja Mohan Raja Bahadur v. CIT AIR 1968 SC 114, State Bank of Travelcore v. CIT, (1986) 2 SCC 11, Devsons Pvt. Ltd v. CIT, 329 ITR 483 (Delhi), Amiantit International Holding Ltd. IN Re 322 ITR 678 (AAR), CIT v. Dinesh Kumar Goel, 331 ITR 10 (Delhi). 10. Admittedly, the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, where under, whenever the right to receive money in the course of a trading transaction accrues or arises, even though income is not realized, income…