1 itxal258.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 258 OF 2011 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 260 OF 2011 WITH INCOME TAX APEAL (L) NO.261 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU), Mumbai ...Appellant. Vs. Industrial Development Bank of India ..Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Appellant. Mr. Ajit Shah with Shrihari Iyer for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 21ST JULY, 2011. P.C. 1. Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal. 2. The ITAT has recorded the finding of the fact that it is not the case of the assessing officer that the assessee has concealed income or filed inaccurate particulars. There was no dispute regarding the assets given on lease, but the dispute was, whether the assessee was entitled to depreciation on those assets which were leased out. The issue being debatable, the ITAT 2 itxal258.11.sxw has deleted the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. We see no infirmity in the order passed by the ITAT. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) ( J.P. DEVADHAR , J.)