TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 952
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....).- This appeal is directed against the order dated August 30, 2013, of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II. Ludhiana. 2. In this appeal the assessee has filed the following grounds : "1. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming penalty of Rs. 3,08,000 levied by the Asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elief and on the advise of his counsel and for which he cannot be penalised." 3. After hearing both parties we find that during assessment proceedings it was noticed that the assessee has set off the unabsorbed depreciation and business losses against the income under the head "Capital gains" which was not allowed and penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated. In respo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt. amounting to Rs. 3,08,000 was levied. 4. On appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Assessing officer. He further relied on the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Cooper P. Ltd. v. CIT C. A. No. 6924 of 2012, [2012] 348 ITR 306 (SC). The learned Commission....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is son Shri Anand Mangal became partner of the firm. In fact Shri N. R. Kapoor who was originally tax consultant also died on June 21, 2006. In his absence M. K. Kapoor his young son who was in practice advised the assessee to claim set off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation and business loss. Therefore this mistake happened and the matter was brought to the knowledge of the assessee. This....