2014 (3) TMI 1136

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 06.09.2013 of CIT (A)- IV, Rajkot confirming the penalty of Rs. 23,800/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual, doing business of mobile recharge coupon. For the assessment year under appeal, he filed the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,46,416/-. On appeal, in the impugned order, ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty of Rs. 23,800/-, levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, for the detailed reason given in paragraph 4 of the impugned order, which reads as under:- "4. Coming to the facts of the case, it is an undisputed fact that the appellant has concealed two items of income viz. i) interest inc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, the penalty levied at Rs. 23,800/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 by the assessing officer for assessment year 2009-10 stands confirmed." Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A) confirming the penalty of Rs. 23,800/-, the assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. At the time of hearing, on behalf of the assessee, Shri D.R. Adhia, AR, appeared and p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... mistake on the part of the assessee that before finalizing his account he has not made cross verification from Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd. He submitted that this was also due to a bonafide mistake as when a person is showing 94% of his receipt, he will not conceal 6% thereof. The ld. AR of the assessee also submitted that this is a pure mistake reamin to be reconciled due to late receipt of state....