2002 (1) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the penalty levied under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, by relying on the additional evidence in contravention of r. 46A." C.O. by the assessee "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in not quashing the penalty levied by the AO. 2. That the learned CIT(A) should have held that no penalty could be levied in absence of recording of satisfaction of concealment by the AO, before initiating such penalty." 3. The facts concerning the matter, in brief, are thus. For the assessment year under consideration, the assessee had filed his return declaring an income of Rs. 2,16,570 and vide order under s. 143(3) of the Act, the assessment was completed on a total income of Rs. 2,57,830. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncealment before initiating the proceedings. 5. Both the parties were heard. The submission of the learned Departmental Representative was that the AO had recorded a categorical finding that no documentary evidence in support of the loans claimed to have been taken by the assessee was placed on record by him and, therefore, the learned CIT(A) has erred in reducing the penalty without any basis, may be on consideration of some additional evidence. In reply, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) had decided the appeal ex parte and, therefore, there was no question of any additional evidence having been taken by him on record. In support of assessee's cross-objection, the learned counsel, while relying upon ....