VSB INVESTMENT (P) LTD. Vs. CIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 11.6.2010, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench 'H', New Delhi (in short "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 3741/DEL/2009, relating to the assessment year 2005-06.

(2.) The following substantial questions of law have been claimed for determination of this Court: " (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Hon'ble Tribunal has erred in law in setting aside the order of CIT(A) and confirming the levy of penalty of Rs. 3,14,478/- under Section 271(1)(c) (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Hon'ble Tribunal has erred in law in not following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro-products Pvt. Ltd., 2010 322 ITR 158 (c) Whether the Tribunal erred in applying Explanation 1(B) of Section 271(1)(c) in respect of charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, contrary to express language of law contained in this regard (d) Whether the order passed by Hon'ble Tribunal is perverse as it has not appreciated that the assessee had disclosed all the facts relating to and material to the computation of income and, therefore, Explanation 1 to Section 271(1)(c) is not applicable

(3.) The facts, in brief, necessary for adjudication as narrated in the appeal, are that the appellant-assessee is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of shares. The assessee filed return for the assessment year 2005-06 at the income of Rs. 68,27,290/-. According to the assessee, it suffered a loss of Rs. 8,59,817/- on the sale of shares. In assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act, the assessing officer made disallowance of the aforesaid amount under the provisions of Section 94(7) of the Act and accordingly, assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 76,87,110/-. Proceedings under Section 271(1) (c) of the Act for imposing penalty were also initiated and the reply submitted on behalf of the assessee to the notice issued in that behalf having been found not satisfactory, the assessing officer observed that it was a case of concealment. The assessing officer, thus, imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,14,478/- by order dated 30.5.2008, which, was however, deleted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short "CIT(A)"] vide order dated 10.7.2009 passed in the appeal preferred by the assessee.