2019 (6) TMI 1257

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ['CIT(A)'] erred in upholding the order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer ['AO'] even though it was time barred under the provisions of Section 275 of the Income tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Ld. AO stating that the appellant intended to defraud taxes while claiming the amount of Rs. 3,64,239 paid to Rites Equipment Limited as expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) thereby erred in upholding penalty on the appellant under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er section 271(1)(c) of the Act are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. " Ground 7: "That the penalty has been initiated vide notice under section 271(l)(c)/ 274 of the Act without any specific charge, hence, the said notice and the order passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. " Ground 8: "That the levy of penalty is illegal, unjust and not in accordance with law as the mandatory requirements of Section 271(1)(c) have not been met in the instant case. " Ground 9: "That the AO/CIT(A) erred in levying penalty on disallowance made on account of contributions made to YRMPL and on account of accrued marketing expenditure and erred in not appreciating that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r sources. However, the business income was determined at Rs. 18106601/- by making an addition of Rs. 8898856/-. The disallowances were of sales tax, marketing expenses and contribution towards AMP activities. 7. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld CIT(A) who deleted the disallowance to the extent of Rs. 12.50 lacs out of total addition of Rs. 8898856/-. The assessee has filed an appeal before ITAT which confirmed the addition of Rs. 2761882/- towards marketing expenses under Development Initiative Scheme and Rs. 4444002/- on account of contribution towards AMP activities to Yum Restaurants Marketing Private Limited (YRMPL). 8. Therefore, the penalty proceedings were initiated on these two issues. The ld AO issued show caus....