2019 (6) TMI 296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of learned CIT-A dated 21.09.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2006-07. 2. The grounds for appeal is that the learned CIT-A erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs. 7,83,991/- under section 271(1)(c) of the income tax act. 3. Brief facts of the case leading to the levy of penalty are that penal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st above order assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. As regards the claim of deprecation on which penalty has been levied, we find that assessee's claim, that assessee was also using the said let out premises as godown has been rejected. This aspect has to be looked from the point of view that the said prices was let out to the assessee's wife its....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mistake of its consultant. 7. In the background of aforesaid discussion and precedent in our considered opinion the assessee need not be visited with the rigours of penal provisions under section 271(1)(c). 8. In this regard we draw support from the larger bench of honourable apex court in the case of Hindustan Steel vs. State of Orissa 83 ITR 26, wherein it was held that the authorities may....