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>Penalty Lifted for Concealed Income: Insufficient Evidence Leads to Deletion of Rs. 9,52,493 Penalty by ITAT Delhi.</h1> <h3>Dhara Motor Finance Limited, C/o Mehra & Co. Chartered Accountants Versus DCIT, Range, Bijnor.</h3> The ITAT Delhi allowed the appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for concealed income due to insufficient evidence. The penalty ... Penalty u/s 271(1) - concealed income representing quantum addition of unexplained cash credits - HELD THAT:- Revenue’s foregoing vehement contention and find no reason to accept the same. This is for the precise reason that the assessee had filed all the relevant details and supportive evidence which ultimately failed to evoke the assessing authority’s concurrence. We quote CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] that quantum and penalty proceedings are parallel proceedings wherein each and every addition/disallowance made in the course of former does not ipso facto attract the latter penalty provision, to delete the impugned penalty in very terms. Assessee’s appeal is allowed. The appeal against penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealed income was allowed by ITAT Delhi due to lack of evidence. The penalty of Rs. 9,52,493 was deleted as the assessee had provided relevant details and evidence. The case was decided in favor of the assessee. (Case Citation: TMI)
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
