TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 1411
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the following grounds of appeal before us: "1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) {CIT(A)} has erred in levying penalty of Rs. 25,55,610/- under section 271(1)(c) of the income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act.'). On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case, said order is ought to be quashed or penalty levied ought to be deleted on the following ground: (a) The order is passed beyond the time allowed u/s 275(1)(a) of the Act and is invalid. (b) The quantum on which penalty is levied does not resulted into enhancement, the order passed is invalid. (c) The appel lant has made ful l disclosure in the return of income and at the t ime of assessment proceedings. (d) The appellant craves leave to add, alter, am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a matter of fact, the CIT(A) accepted the method of revenue recognition that was followed by the assessee. However, the CIT(A) by adopting the average sale price of the unsold area at Rs. 28,808/- (as against Rs. 28,000/- that was adopted by the assessee) recomputed the profit at Rs. 1,73,65,456/- (as against the profit worked out by the assessee at Rs. 88,46,754/-). Accordingly, the CIT(A) sustained the addition of Rs. 85,18,702/- [Rs. 1,73,65,456/- (-) Rs. 88,46,754/-], as against the addition of Rs. 2,39,00,000/- made by the A.O. The CIT(A) also initiated penalty proceedings under Sec. 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars in respect of the aforesaid addition. 4. The A.O after receiving the order of the CIT(A), dated 26.02.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ves for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. We find that the Tribunal while disposing off the quantum appeal of the assessee for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2010-11 had vacated the addition of Rs. 85,18,702/- that was confirmed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal while vacating the aforesaid addition had observed as under: "7.1. The next aspect to be decided with regard to the addition of Rs. 2.39 crores is with regard to the valuation of unsold flats as on 31.3.2010. The assessee had valued the unsold flats the lower of cost or market value as on 31.3.2010, which is in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for valuation of inventories. We find that th....