1 itxa2830-10 agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2830 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai ..Appellant. Versus Johnson & Johnson Limited ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant. Mr.Subhash S. Shetty for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.A. Sayed, JJ. DATE : 25th July, 2011. P.C. : 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal. 2. The dispute in the present case relates to claiming expenditure on account of drawings and designs as revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure. According to the assessee, the expenditure was allowable as revenue expenditure. However, the Assessing Officer as also the appellate authorities have held that the expenditure was capital in nature. The assessee has not contested the decision of the Tribunal in view of the fact that relief has been granted to the assessee by way of depreciation. 2 itxa2830-10 3. The finding of fact recorded by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is that the assessee bona fide believed that the expenditure was allowable as a revenue expenditure and in such a case there being no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be sustained. 4. In our opinion, no fault can be found with the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.A. Sayed, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)