TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 1317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of land. Regular books of accounts are maintained which are audited u/s 44AB. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee could not furnish some of the vouchers and WIP stock details as finely required by him. The assessee filed explanation in this behalf dated 26-12-2008 contending that the books of account were duly audited under the Companies Act as well as Income Tax Act u/s 44AB. The record has been maintained to the maximum possible extent. The valuation of work in progress has been done by way of physical verification. Looking at the nature of the assessee's business, it was not possible to maintain the minute details which were being asked for, however in the conclusion of the letter, assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i Lal Padampat Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. State of UP & Others 118 ITR 326. (2) Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orrisa, 80 ITR 26(S.C.) (3) D.M. Dhanukar vs. CIT , 65 ITR 280 (Bombay) (4) Chhota Bhai Jetha Bhai Patel & Co. vs. CIT, 134 ITR 201 (Guj.) The AO however, imposed the penalty. 2.3 In the first appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the finding of the AO that the assessee has not furnished the correct particulars of income and upheld the penalty. 2.4 Being aggrieved, the assessee is before us. 2.5 The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the facts and circumstances of the case as contended before the lower authorities. It is pleaded that assessee did not offer to reject the books and as AO was unrelenting on the specific details....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 ITR 158 (SC) for the proposition that the assessee has filed all the relevant details along with return of income. Thereafter if some disallowances or additions by AO based on the information furnished in the return do not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and is not exigible to impugned penalty. Thus the penalty imposed by the ld. CIT(A) may be deleted. 2.7 The ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and also placed reliance in the case of Mak Data (P) Ltd. vs. CIT ,358 ITR 593 (SC). 2.8 The ld. Counsel for the assessee in reply of Mak Data (P) Ltd. case (supra) contended that in Mak Data case there was un-quantified surrender whereas in this case of the assessee there was no surrender to reject book....