2016 (1) TMI 745

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the case in calculating the quantum of penalty. iii) That the appellant craves to leave to add, alter, amend any of the grounds of appeal at any time on or before the date of hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment proceedings in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act 1961 on 5.3.2013 at a total income of Rs. 7,38,850/- against the returned income of Rs. 2,00,000/-. During the assessment proceedings, while examining the blank statement it was noticed that the deposits of Rs. 4,84,969/- and Rs. 18,24,975/- appearing on 24.2.2010. The assessee was asked to furnish the source of these deposits. In response, vide letter dated 15.1.2013 the assessee stated that he booked a flat with BPTP Ltd and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al. 6. Ld. Counsel of the assessee reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal and requested that the penalty in dispute may be deleted. 7. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the authorities below. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the orders of the revenue authorities. I find that the Ld. CIT(A) has elaborately dealt with the issue in dispute and held as under:- "a) From the facts of the case, it is clear that the interest amount had been received by e appellant and also been reflected in form no. 26AS pertaining, to the appellant. It is also clear that the amount of Rs. 5,38,854/- had been received in the appellant bank account even though the appellant has ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the I.T. Act, 1961. c) However, with regard to the computation of amount the AO is directed to reduce the amount of TDS, if the same has not been considered for taxes already paid by the appellant. Similarly, the AO may verify the claim of the appellant that the total amount of penalty should be Rs. 1,25,306/- instead of Rs. 1,45,906/-. Therefore, with regard to the computation of penalty the AO is directed to make the necessary rectification after giving credit for the TDS deducted by M/s BPTP and also keeping in view the computation of tax as argued by the AR of the Appellant. In view of the above observations the imposition of penalty in the principle is upheld, however, the computation of penalty may be re....