2017 (2) TMI 26

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....only substantial ground is that "Whether ld. CIT(A) erred in reducing the quantum of penalty u/s 221(1) from 100% to 10%." 2. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is proprietor of M/s Gunina Ventures, filed return of income for relevant AY on 30.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs. 12,61,13,591/-. On the income declared by the assessee, the tax payable was Rs. 4,25,81,870/- which was payable before filing of return of income. On verification, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the self-assessmnt tax was not paid by assessee before filing return of income. Due to non-payment of self-assessment tax, the assessee was deemed to be assessee in default in respect of tax and interest as both remained unpaid in accordance with ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e penalty to 10% of tax liablity. 3. We have noticed that the C.O. filed by assessee is beyond 61 days of period of limitation. The assessee along with C.O. filed application for condonation of delay which is further supported by an affidavit of Prashant R. Samdani. In the application, the assessee contended that assessee received notice of appeal by Revenue on 07.07.2015. The assessee could file his C.O. till 06.08.2015. The assessee filed his objection only on 30.09.2015. Thus, there is delay of 60 days in filing the C.O. The contents of the affidavit further disclosed that assessee approached Shri Pradip N. Kapasi, C.A. in the first week of August 2015 and after advice of C.A. assessee decided to file C.O. 4. On application for condona....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of CA of the assessee. Though we are not satisfied with the ground of condonation of delay. However, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing C.O. and to decide the same on merit. Hence, the application for condonation of delay in filing the C.O. is allowed. 6. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for Revenue and Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and perused the material available on record. The Ld. DR for the Revenue argued that assessee failed to pay due tax before filing the return of income. The assessee further failed to pay the amount of due tax despite the notice of initiation of penalty. The assessee was casual in following the provision....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The assessee during the penalty proceedings assured the AO that he would pay the amount by 31.12.2012. The assessee also had shown the statement of his Bank Account wherein there was no sufficient cash balance. Ld. AR of the assessee would argue that assessee sufficiently explained the circumstances before the AO in the penalty proceedings and the same was sufficiently explained as per 2nd proviso to section 221(1) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) considered the circumstances and granted the partial relief to the assessee. The assessee is not liable to pay the amount of liability saddled upon him. There was no intentional or deliberate default on the part of assessee. In support of Cross Objections it was argued by the ld. AR of the assessee th....