1 8 itxal 948.11 949 .doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION k INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 948 OF 2011 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 949 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax - 18 .. Appellant Vs. Gautam Hiralal Gandhi .. Respondent. Mr. D.K. Kamwal for the Appellant. Mr. Prakash Shah with Jas Sanghavi i/b PDS Legal for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR & K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 7TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1 Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this Appeal. 2 In the present case, the Assessee had claimed special deduction under chapter VIA of the Act by disclaiming depreciation. In view of the conflicting decision prevailing at the material time, no fault could be found with the Assessee in disclaiming depreciation. Therefore, in the facts of the present 2 8 itxal 948.11 949 .doc case, the decision of the ITAT in holding that the Assessee has not concealed or furnished inaccurate particulars of income and consequently Section 271 (1)(c) is not attracted cannot be faulted. Hence, the Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (K.K. TATED, J.)