2019 (6) TMI 423

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cancellation of booking of flat in the original return. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of A.O of levying the above penalty of Rs. 2,04,8557- by reopening the assessment though the revised return disclosing the alleged undisclosed income was filed physically along with letter at the time when the assessment for A.Y 2010-11 was going on. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of A.O of levying the above penalty of Rs. 2,04,8557- though the assurance was given by the A.O to the appellant of not re-opening the assessment if the revised return is filed. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of A.O of levying the above penalty of Rs. 2,04,8557- without taking into consideration the appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssue of notice u/s, 148 of the I.T.Act, 1961 and was not disclosed by the assessee himself within the stipulated time by filing a revised return u/s. 139(5), penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 were initiated by issue and service of relevant notice along with notice of demand. The assessee did not comply with the said notice. Thereafter, letter dated 30.05.2014 was issued in response to which the assessee made submissions vide letter dated 20.05.2014 which has been reproduced by the AO at page 3 of the penalty order The assessee's submission was considered by the AO but was not found acceptable. The AO observed that it was the AO who had detected and brought to the notice of the assessee the undisclosed short term capital gain ....