##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

AND DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकरअपीलस.ं /ITA No. 675/RJT/2025 Assessment Year: (2015-16)

Pranav Tulsibhai Tanti Vs. The DCIT, Circle – 1(1)

Rachana, 3 Nalanda Society, Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Kalavad Road, Road, Rajkot – 360001 Rajkot - 360001

(cid:725)ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ADJPT9763B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)

Date of Hearing : 23/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 06/04/2026

आदेश / ORDER Per, Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM:

Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Years (AY) 2015-16, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC”], dated 26.08.2025, which in turn arises out of a penalty order passed by Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “the AO”] u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the

Act”], vide order dated 29.12.2017.

2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, are as follows:

“1. The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law the in confirming penalty of Rs.1,34,64,000/- on the alleged ground that the appellant concealed the particulars of the income in respect of disallowance of depreciation of Rs.4,08,00,000/-. The

ITA No. 675/RJT/2024 Pranav Tulsibhai Tanti

penalty levied and confirmed unjustified and uncalled for which may kindly be deleted.

3. Your Honour’s appellant craves leave to add, to amend alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal.”

3. Brief facts of the case in the case, return of income for the AY 2015-16 was e- filed on 30.09.2015 declaring current year loss of Rs.20,29,07,303/- proprietary concern M/s. PT Wind Energy engaged in the business of generation of power and energy. Assessment u/s. 143(3) was completed on 28.12.2017 determining loss at Rs. 16,21,07,303/- and loss of Rs. 4,08,00,000/- was disallowed on account of excess claim of depreciation, penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated for furnishing inaccurate particular of income and accordingly notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 29.12.2017 were issued to the assessee. A notice issued to the assessee for levied penalty on 13.06.2015, in response to the notice the assessee submitted that the assessee has not furnished inaccurate particular of income, return of income was filed on 30.09.2015, declaring total loss at Rs. 20,39,07,303/-. However, the assessment was finalised u/s. 143(3) on 13.12.2017 computing a total loss of Rs.16,21,07,303/-. The depreciation of Rs. 4,08,00,000/- was disallowed on the ground that wind mill was purchase on 27.03.2015 and the it was put to use for the business for less then 30 days so @50% of the depreciation was allowed and rest @50% will be disallowed. However, the assessing officer of the view that excess depreciation claim of Rs. 4,08,00,000/- tantamount to furnishing the inaccurate income and the assessee was liable to penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, and levied penalty of

Rs.1,34,64,000/-.

4. That the assessee has filed an appeal before the AO. The Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by following observation:

“The appellant assessee has also not provided any documentary evidences like Balance-sheet, Profit & Loss account, depreciation chart, details of depreciation etc, to this appellate authority. So it was very much clear that the appellant has furnished

inaccurate particulars.

Page 2 of 6

ITA No. 675/RJT/2024 Pranav Tulsibhai Tanti

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.”

5. That the assessee filed an appeal against the impugned order dated 29.12.2017 before this Tribunal.

a. During the course of hearing, the Ld. A