7] On the other hand, Mr. Chhotaray appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. There are findings of fact rendered concurrently. The deductions were claimed on the basis of expenses incurred. It may be that certain expenses have been termed as capital expenditure and, therefore, incurred in relation to the Research and Development wing, hence sustained, but the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal in Quantum Proceeding as also in Penalty Proceeding concurrently found that there were 9 items of revenue expenditure. In relation to 6 items despite several opportunities being given, the Assessee failed to produce the relevant documents. It is in such circumstances that the Tribunal held that none of the judgments could assist the Assessee. The judgments proceed on the footing that when a claim is raised and it could not be sustained or proved, then, straightway the imposition of penalty was not justified. Further, the auditors report could be a vital material at the time of assessment but during the course of penalty proceedings the judgments rendered in assessment matters will not be of
