2016 (3) TMI 1099

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., A.R. ORDER S. S. Godara (Judicial Member) This assessee's appeal for A.Y. 2006-07, arises from order of the CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad dated 03-12-2012 in appeal no. CIT(A)- XVI/ITO/Wd. 11(3)/079/11-12 confirming penalty of Rs. 1,10,000/-, in proceedings under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short "the Act". 2. We have heard both the parties. Facts of the case appears to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Various other additions regarding demat account etc. were also made. The Assessing Officer alleged assessee's non-operation and initiated the impugned penalty proceedings. 3. The assessee preferred quantum appeal. The CIT(A) partly accepted the same in his order dated 28-07-2009. The Assessing Officer passed consequential order on 04-09-2009 working out the total taxable income as Rs. 5,13,243/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 5. The CIT(A) affirms the Assessing Officer's action. 6. We heard both the parties. Relevant facts narrated hereinabove are not repeated for the same of brevity. Both the authorities below penalizes the assessee alleging his failure in complying to scrutiny notices u/s. 142(1) r.w.s. 143(2) of the Act. It emerges from the assessment order that the assessee had filed part details on 30-11-2007 ....