TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 838
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in partly confirming the action of assessing officer in imposing penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act by sustaining the penalty on the addition of Rs. 1,93,813/- on account of low G.P. and Rs. 19,800/- on disallowance of depreciation on computer. 2. It is therefore prayed that penalty imposed by Assessing Officer and confirmed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may please be deleted. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the appeal on the basis of written submissions. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to proceed in the matter in the absence of assessee. 4. The ld.counsel for the assessee.Sr.DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the addition has been sustained on these two issues upto the stage of this Tribunal, therefore the ld.CIT(A) was justified for sustaining the penalty. 5. We have heard the ld.Sr.DR, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below as well as the written submissions filed by the assessee. We find that the penalty has been sustained on two items; namely, the addition made on account of estimation of Gross Profit and disallowance of depreciation on computer. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the addition of Rs. 1,93,813/- by adopting the GP ratio @ 9% and also confirmed disallowance of depreciation. The Id. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty on the additions sustained by the Honourable Tribunal. 4. The assessee's submission on the penalty sustained by CIT(A) on the above 2 additions are as under: Penalty on addition of Rs. 1,93,813/- on account of low GP: 4.1 During the year under consideration assessee has shown gross profit at 8.27% on turnover of Rs. 8.89 lacs, as against gross profit of the preceding assessment year at 10.55% on turnover of Rs. 25.38 lacs. Assessing Officer requested assessee to furnish the reasons for decline in Gross Profit Ratio. In response to the same assessee furnished a comparative chart showi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 280 ITR 487(Guj) iv. CIT(A) vs. Raj Bans Singh 276 ITR 351 (All) v. CIT vs. Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel 261 ITR 216(Guj) vi. CIT vs. Shivnarayan Jamnalal & Co. 232 ITR 311 (MP). vii. CIT V. Shivnarayan Jamnalal & Co. - 232 ITR 311 (MP) viii. CIT V. K. L. Mangal Sain - 107 ITR 598 (ALL) 4.3 The Id. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the penalty on the GP addition. The Honourable Tribunal has held that the application of same GP of last year could not be justified as turnover has increased 3 times. The Honourable Tribunal has estimated GP @ 9% considering the non production of books of accounts. The books could not be produced as they were destroyed in flood. Penalty on addition of Rs. 19,800/- being disallowance of depreciation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n case of CIT v/s. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. - 322 ITR 158 (SC). 5. The assessee has wrongly sought the adjournment at the time of the hearing fixed on 23.02.2015 & 22.06.2015 on the ground that the quantum appeal in ITA No. 2539/A/2012 is pending. The quantum appeal filed by the department was pending in respect of addition of Rs. 67,45,000/- u/s. 68 deleted by CIT(A) which has no relevance to other two additions confirmed by the Honourable Tribunal in ITA No. 3208/A/2008 for which the penalty was sustained by CIT(A). 6. In view of the above, your honour is requested to delete the penalty. Date : 29. 07. 201 5 Place: Surat Signed (Rasesh Shah)" 5.1. So far as sustenance of penalty on addition on account o....