Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>ITAT grants appellant chance to explain penalty avoidance, stresses compliance with AO notice.</h1> <h3>Jatinbhai Bhanubhai Patel Versus ITO, Ahmedabad </h3> Jatinbhai Bhanubhai Patel Versus ITO, Ahmedabad - TMI Issues:Appeal against penalty u/s. 271(1)(C) for A.Y. 2005-06.Analysis:The appellant filed a return of Nil income for A.Y. 2005-06, which was scrutinized under section 143(3) of the IT Act. Discrepancies were found regarding the cost of acquisition of a flat and claimed interest expenses, leading to the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(C) for concealing income and furnishing inaccurate particulars. The CIT(A) considered valuation reports and estimated the fair market value of the flat, resulting in a revised Long Term Capital Gain. Despite being given an opportunity to explain, the penalty was imposed by the Assessing Officer. The appellant challenged this penalty order before the CIT(A) but failed to comply with statutory notices, leading to the confirmation of the penalty.The appellant, in the appeal before the ITAT, argued that the additions were debatable and the interest claim was an oversight, citing relevant case laws. The ITAT noted that the Assessing Officer had specifically mentioned concealment of income in the penalty order and that the appellant did not respond to the allegations. While confirming the penalty, the ITAT granted the appellant another opportunity to provide reasons for not imposing the penalty initially and directed full compliance with the notice.In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes, providing a chance to explain the reasons for not imposing the penalty earlier and emphasizing compliance with the notice issued by the Assessing Officer.