2017 (2) TMI 412

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w and on the facts in confirming the penalty amounting to Rs. 3,31,411/- levied U/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 by the ld. A.O. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case 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 (hereinafter referred as the Act) was framed vide order dated 31/12/2008. While framing the assessment, the Assessing Officer rejected the books of account and applied gross profit @ 25% on the basis of unverifiable purchases. The A.O. also initiated penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars/concealing true particulars of income. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue in quantum proceedings rea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome, therefore, it was held that the penalty pertaining to inflation of purchases are rightly levied. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench decision in the case of ITO Vs. Sru Knitters (P) Ltd. 110 TTJ 671. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and also gone through the orders of the lower authorities. The Coordinate Bench in the identical case i.e. in the case of ITO Vs. M/s Bhansali Trading Corporation, has held as under:- "6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. The addition made by the Assessing Officer was specific on account of unverifiable purchases on which ....