2019 (5) TMI 176

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....GGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER):- 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [AY] 2009-10 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-45, Mumbai [CIT(A)], Appeal No. CIT(A)-45/ACIT-33(1)/ITA-187/2016-17 dated 12/12/2017 on effective grounds of appeal: - 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....09/2009. The assessee reflected Short Term Capital Losses of Rs. 149.94 Lacs and Long-Term Capital Losses of Rs. 11.90 Lacs. These losses were related to dealing in shares & securities. After examining these transactions, Ld. AO came to a conclusion that loss reflected under the head Capital Gains were to be treated as Business losses. Another addition for Rs. 7,863/- was also made in the hands....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome under which the loss was offered by the assessee vis-à-vis the head under which the loss was finally assessed by the Ld. AO. Further the issue was debatable one. Moreover, there was no change in returned loss or assessed loss. It was also noted that similar penalty levied for AY 2008-09 was deleted by its predecessor on identical facts. The penalty against addition of Rs. 7,863/- was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent of particulars of income so as to attract the provisions of Section 271(1)(c), in our opinion, have remained unfulfilled in the present case. The same is evident from the fact that penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for AY 2010-11, on identical facts, was dropped by Ld. AO himself vide order dated 24/05/2013, a copy of which is on record. Therefore, penalty was not justified on this count, as r....