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>Tribunal partially allows appeal on penalty under Income-tax Act for AY 2008-09.</h1> <h3>Shri Babubhai Ganpatram Painter Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (3) (1), Surat.</h3> Shri Babubhai Ganpatram Painter Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (3) (1), Surat. - TMI Issues involved:Appeal against penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act based on additions made during assessment year 2008-09.Detailed Analysis:1. Addition on unexplained bank deposits and interest credited:The case was reopened based on AIR Information regarding cash deposits and share transactions. The AO made three additions totaling &8377; 29,79,258. Ld.CIT(A) upheld an addition of &8377; 19,90,438 and restricted others. The AO imposed a penalty of &8377; 8,66,167, upheld by ld. CIT(A). Assessee appealed, arguing that additions were estimated and penalty shouldn't apply. Tribunal found that only peak credit of &8377; 2,56,590 should be considered due to lack of evidence. Citing precedents, the Tribunal partially allowed this ground.2. Addition on unexplained share transactions:The AO made an addition of &8377; 3,05,420, which was reduced to &8377; 2,75,459 by ld.CIT(A). The Tribunal further reduced it to &8377; 1,37,730, considering market fluctuations. Assessee contended that the estimation was high, but Tribunal found 10% of share transactions to be reasonable. This ground was partly allowed by the Tribunal.3. Addition on unexplained loan transactions:An addition of &8377; 3,42,400 was made, consisting of various items. Assessee provided explanations and evidence before ld.CIT(A), but no findings were given. The Tribunal noted that penalty proceedings are separate and independent. As the additions were estimated and reasonable explanations were provided, the Tribunal found no grounds for penalty under section 271(1)(c) on this addition. Thus, this ground was allowed.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, considering the estimation basis of the additions and the reasonable explanations provided. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) was found unjustified based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
TaxTMI 