Tribunal held that merely because the assessee had accepted the addition that would not automatically lead to the conclusion that it had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Moreover, the contention of the assessee that considering the huge losses the assessee would not have derived any benefit by wrongly claiming such expenditure stands to reason. The assessee had claimed certain amount as deduction and had also furnished full particulars of such claim. In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer holding a different view had disallowed the expenditure. However, the disallowance of expenditure by the Assessing Officer ipso facto would not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income and concealed its income. The imposition of penalty was deleted.( AY.2012-13)
ITO v. Future Mobile And Accessories Ltd. (2018) 64 ITR 699 (Mum) (Trib)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Accepting addition does not mean assessee furnishing inaccurate particulars — Levy of penalty is held m to be not valid .