TaxTMI Login
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
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal dismissed for penalty under Income Tax Act. Failure to prove transactions' genuineness.</h1> <h3>Brijesh Jaikishin Rupani Versus Income Tax Officer-23 (1) (3), MUMBAI</h3> Brijesh Jaikishin Rupani Versus Income Tax Officer-23 (1) (3), MUMBAI - TMI Issues:Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2010-11.Analysis:The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the AY 2010-11. The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but they did not appear, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Revenue supported the order of the CIT(A). The only issue in dispute was the penalty of Rs. 2,15,400 under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee did not appeal against the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld the penalty order. Citing various judgments, including the one from the Hon'ble Apex Court, the CIT(A) found that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness and bonafides of the transactions in question. The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating no reason to interfere with it. Consequently, the grounds raised by the assessee were rejected, and the appeal was dismissed. The order was pronounced on February 1, 2019.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
