2021 (8) TMI 319

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... D.R.; ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, New Delhi, dated 26.09.2017 wherein the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) of Rs. 1,39,050/- by the ACIT, Circle 62(1) New Delhi, for order dated 28.09.2016 passed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e was added to the total income of the assessee and order under Section 143(3) of the Act was passed making the above addition. The ld. AO in the assessment order at page No. 4 initiated the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof. Based on this a show cause notice was issued to the assessee under Section 274 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. The assessee challenged the same before the ld. CIT (Appeals) who passed an order on 27-28.09.2017 on merits, confirming the penalty for concealment of income. After that on 27.07.2017 appeal against the quantum assessment order was also confirmed by the CIT (Appeals) on 28.07.2017. Therefore, the assessee aggrieved with the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) confirming penalty of Rs. 1,39,050/- i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g of the satisfaction did not show that how both the charges are tested for levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. There may be certain circumstances where both the charges may sustain, but the ld. AO at the time of recording satisfaction must demonstrate that how both the charges are satisfied. Even in the penalty order, such exercise has not been carried out. The issue is squarely c....