2017 (3) TMI 194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CIT(A) erred in relying on decision of CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD (Delhi) and other decisions for dismissal of appeal for want of persuasion of appeal without appreciating the fact that appellant was not served notice of hearing. (2).On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming concealment penalty us 271(1)(c) of Rs. 6,63,360/- without appreciating the facts that appellant has neither concealed any income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of income. (3).On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on decision in case of CIT Vs. Zoom Communication (Pvt.) Ltd.(2010) 327 ITR 310/191 Taxman 179 (Delhi) which is distinguishable on the facts. (4). On fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g of commodities through MCX exchange had filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs. 38,38,583/- on 28.12.2009. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny proceedings u/s. 143(2) of the 'Act'. That during the course of the scrutiny proceedings the A.O being of the view that the loss of Rs. 18,92,790/- reflected by the assessee from trading of commodities through MCX exchange, being in the nature of a Speculation loss had thus wrongly been set off by the assessee against his business income, therefore added back the same to the latters returned income. The A.O further while culminating the assessment proceedings initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) as regards the aforesaid addition of Rs, 18,92,790/-(supra). 3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the case therein submitted that the quantum addition of Rs. 18,92,790/- made by the A.O by holding that the loss suffered by the assessee from trading of commodities at MCX exchange, being in the nature of a speculation loss was not entitled to be set off against the business income of the assessee, had been set aside by the CIT(A) vide his order dated 01.06.2015 passed in appeal no. CIT(A)-26, IT/64/14-15/1 (copy placed on record), wherein the said first appellate authority had directed the A.O to treat the loss of Rs. 18,92,790/-(supra) as a business loss and allow set off of the same against the business income of the assessee. It was further submitted by the Ld. A.R that the appeal of the department against the aforesaid order of the ....