2013 (10) TMI 103

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;  "1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, in respect of addition of Rs 10,91,580 made on the account of alleged income from benami accounts.      2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of addition of Rs 4,14,982 made on the ground of alleged bogus expenses." 3. To adjudicate on this appeal, only a few material facts need to be taken note of. As far as addition of Rs 4,14,982, in respect of which impugned penalty is levied, is concerned, it is sufficient to take note o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es by rejecting assessee's contention that the books of accounts have been washed away in the floods and for the reasons that "the onus is upon the assessee to prove genuineness of expenses" and that "in this case, the assessee has not produced any evidence to discharge the said onus". It is in this backdrop and in respect of the said disallowance of alleged bogus expenses that the impugned penalty is levied by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A). Not satisfied by the stand so taken by the CIT(A) in confirming the impugned penalty, the assessee is in second appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered factual matrix of the case in the light of the applicable legal....