Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2018 (3) TMI 1806

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....respectively.    2. Since the grievance of the both the appellants relate to the similar set of facts, therefore both the appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.    3. In ITA No. 1078/Ahd/2015, the assessee is aggrieved by the levy of penalty of Rs. 22.15 lacs u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and ITA No. 1079/Ahd/2015, the assessee is aggrieved by the levy of penalty of Rs. 9 lacs u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act.    4. Facts of the case which trigger the levy of penalty relates to the deposit of cash fond in the Axis Bank Ltd, Vastrapur Branch and also in ICICI Bank, Vastrapur Branch in the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... levying penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act.    9. Assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success.    10. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that though he has lost in the quantum proceedings but the fact of the matter is that the cash found to be deposited in the bank account were related to the sales of suit pieces. It is the say of the ld. counsel that business receipts were deposited in the bank account and at the most only profit margin should have been considered as the income of the assessee. Be that as it may, the ld. counsel stated that the penalty so levied is contrary to the facts of the case. Per contra, the ld. D.R. strongly supported the findings of....