TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (3) TMI 141
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er: "1. The learned Assessing Officer having failed to record his satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings during the course of assessment proceedings, the impugned penalty levied is bad in law, null and void and without jurisdiction and hence the learned C.I.T.[A] ought to have deleted the same. The impugned penalty being bad in law and without jurisdiction the same may please be deleted. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T [A] has failed to appreciate that the explanation offered by the appellant in the matter of alleged default was reasonable and bonafide and that there was no malafide intention on the part of the appellant to conceal his income and defraud the revenue. In the circumsta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ains from business or profession at Rs .1,94,861/-. However after the assessment, the AO assesseed said business income at Rs 37,25,096/-. This variance is attributable to the following adjustment, namely,- 1) Section 44AF of the Act: Rejection of the assessee's claim on the applicability of the provision of 44AF of the Act. AO held that the assessee invalidly invoked the provision, which is legally meant for retail business involving goods or merchandise. Whereas the assessee's business income relates to commission income. Therefore, the income determination @ 5% of the turnover is erroneous. 2) Adjustments to the Commission Receipts: AO made adjustment to the receipts. The assessee initially furnished in the return that the gross receip....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; Postage & Telephone 37,135 Engineering Services 2,87,500 Printing & Stationery 18,530 Professional Charges 1,55,150 Depreciation 97,125 TOTAL 11,11,460 NET PROFIT 24,71,457 5. On examining the above expenditure claims, the assessing officer allowed depreciation claim in full and allowed the traveling and conveyance expenditure only to the extent of Rs.75,000/-. Finally, all other claims are disallowed by the AO. The reasons given by the AO in this regard is as under. "Regarding, the total cash withdrawal of Rs.1,95,000/- in the Bank account appears to be towards Household withdrawal. However, by giving a libera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scrupulously to the receipts earned on account of commission and brokerage confirms the same. Relying on the amended provisions of section 44AD of the Act, he mentioned that the expression 'eligible business' means any business except business of plying hiring or leasing goods carries refer to in section 44AE though this amendment with effect from 01/04/11 and it covers the assessee now. However, as per the assessee's counsel, there is always debate which will help the assessee in matters of penalty proceedings like the one under consideration and when the debate is possible, the penalty provisions u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not attracted. Secondly, regarding the adjustment made to the commission/brokerage receipts, the Learned Counsel arg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....penalties u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 8. On the other hand, the Learned DR for the revenue argued stating that the assessee has failed to discharge his duties in furnishing the details. Further, he argued stating that the assessee's bonafide plea of the applicability of Section 44AF is also not demonstrated. In such circumstances, a penalty is leviable and he relied on both orders of the revenue. Further, he also filed a copy of Delhi High Court in the case of Zoom Communication (P) Ltd. 327 ITR 520 to support his line of argument. 9. We have heard both the parties, perused the orders of the revenue and the evidences available before us. The penalties were levied by the AO for the above discussed three counts. (i) Provisions of section 44AF....