2012 (8) TMI 982

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... PER RAJENDRA, A.M. Challenging the order dated 23.09.2010 of the CIT(A)-16, Mumbai Appellant has filed following Grounds of Appeal: "1.The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the penalty of Rs. 88,337/- levied by the A.O under section 271(1))(c) of the Act on the ground that the appellant had invested less amount in Capital Gain Bonds under section 54EC of the Act to c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pital Gain made. 4. The lower authorities failed to appreciate that the wrong advice / mistake/ error of judgment on the part of the Appellant's Chartered Accountant cannot be equated with concealment on the part of appellant so as to invoke section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add to, alter, modify or amplify any of the aforesaid grounds at or before the hearing. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lakhs in different bonds. So, he restricted the exemption to Rs. 67.15 lakhs only. Assessee did not prefer any appeal about the said disallowance. 3. For the excess claim, made by the assessee, u/s.54 EC the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1) (c) of the Act. After considering the submissions of the assessee AO held that it was convenient judgment of the assessee to claim an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....delay in investing the sums he paid taxes accordingly, that he did not file any appeal against the order of the AO in quantum proceedings, that it was not a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealing of income. He relied upon the cases of Reliance Petrochemicals (322ITR158) and Udayan Mukherjee (291ITR318). Departmental Representative (DR) submitted that assessee had not disclosed ....