2017 (5) TMI 533

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,70,69,864/- after certain adjustments and disallowances vide order dated 30/12/2008 against returned income of Rs. 1,11,48,990/- e-filed by the assessee on 28/11/2006. The assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing of different kinds of glasses for which it has an industrial undertaking at Daman, an eligible entity to claim deduction u/s 80-IB @30%. During Assessment proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee credited a sum of Rs. 1,07,05,561/- under the head 'other income' which comprised of interest, foreign exchange gains, misc. income, dividend on shares etc. against which deduction u/s 80-IB was claimed, which, in the opinion of Ld. AO, was not income derived from industrial undertaking and hence not eligible for the sai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt words has not been striked-off and therefore, the assessee has lost a vital right to contest the same. Per contra, Ld. DR asserted that the penalty has clearly been initiated by Ld. AO with due application of mind and the assessee, at all time, knew the offence for which the penalty was being levied and hence debarred from raising the legal ground now. Our attention was drawn to the provisions of Section 292B to contend that even presuming a defect in the notice u/s 274, the same do not invalidate the penalty proceedings. Further, the assessee actively contested the penalty proceedings fully knowing the grounds for which he was being penalized. 6. After hearing rival contentions, we do not see much weight in the legal grounds raised by ....