2019 (6) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Revenue : Shri S.K. Jain ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. Aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order dated 1st May 2017, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, Mumbai, confirming penalty of Rs. 25,80,510, imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. Brief f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....otal expenditure claimed on ad-hoc basis which worked out to Rs. 75,91,967. The assessee challenged the aforesaid disallowance before the first appellate authority. 3. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the submissions of the assessee deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. However, while disposing off the appeal filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid order of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ully verifiable. Thus, he submitted, there is no doubt about the genuineness of the expenditure claimed. Thus, he submitted, the case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income is not made out. Therefore, he submitted, the penalty imposed should be deleted. 5. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissione....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on record to suggest that the assessee did not furnish full particulars of expenditure claimed or there was any act of omission or commission on the part of the assessee in furnishing the particulars of expenditures. Part disallowance of expenditure claimed is purely on estimate basis. In the aforesaid circumstances, the assessee cannot be accused of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. M....