JUDGMENT

1. Heard Ms Aarti Sathe, learned counsel for the appellant / assessee and Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, learned standing counsel, Revenue for the respondent.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the assesee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (briefly 'the Act' hereinafter) against the order dated 11.01.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'F' Bench, Mumbai ('Tribunal' for short) in I.T.A.No.5535/Mumbai/2014 for the assessment year 2003-04 filed by the assessee.

3. The appeal has been preferred by the assessee projecting the following questions as substantial questions of law:-

"A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal erred in upholding the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act of Rs.22,08,860/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty only) on account of disallowance of Rs.62,47,460/- (Rupees Sixty Two Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty only) which was allowable as a deduction under the provisions of Section 37 of theAct?

B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal erred in not applying the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in th