TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 852
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment year 1984-85 :- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Hon'ble ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty by holding that nothing was brought on record by the Revenue to prove that net profit arrived at by the assessee was a result of concealment of income by the assessee when it was categorically proved in the order after utilizing the documents and evidences available coupled with corroborate evidences in the shape of various figures found in the return filed by the assessee that the assessee had concealed its income? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in taking a different view of facts that penalty was imposed on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... profit of Rs. 6,70,681 was arrived at by the ex-accountant of the assessee Sh. Sidhu for assessment year 1983-84. However, we have noticed the fact that the nothing could be brought by the revenue that such net profit arrived was a result of concealment of any income by the assessee whereas we find force in the submission of the ld. AR that such net profit was a result of disallowance of excess expenditure claimed by the assessee, which cannot attract penal provisions under section 271(1)(c). We, therefore, after going through the said order of ITAT, find merit in the submission of ld. AR that the addition sustained by the ITAT was basically on account of disallowance of expenditure and not on account of appraisal of seized material. We ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P rate of 19 per cent and the same was applied at 13 per cent thereafter and the same was made the basis for the additions. The assessee wants to convey that main addition are only on account of higher gross profit rate after deducting the trading discount from turnover. The assessee wants to convey that applying a GP rate of 19.7 per cent did not make the assessee liable for penal action under section 271(1)(c). As regards the sales outside the books of account are concerned, the same were computed at Rs. 4545744 outside books of account and they were confirmed in appeal also. It will also be appropriate to mention here that application under section 245C(1) was rejected by the Settlement Commission. The appeal of the assessee had been he....