2021 (9) TMI 912

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sushma Singh, CIT(DR) ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, New Delhi, ["Ld. CIT(A)", for short], dated 20.11.2019 for Assessment Year 2009-10, on the following grounds: "1. The CIT(A] erred in upholding penalty, on the facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, u/s 271(l](....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant did not furnish any document(s), submissions and explanations which were inaccurate. Order passed by the CIT(A) is against binding judicial precedents. 4. That the CIT(A) erred in upholding Order u/s 271(1)[c) of the Act, passed by the Assessing Officer imposing penalty of Rs. 15,45,000/- without supplying copy of statement of third party who have been searched u/s 132(1] o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ied by the AO vide order dated 28.03.2019, amounting to Rs. 15,45,000/- which was minimum penalty @100% of tax sought to be evaded, for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The assessee's appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 20.11.2019 of Ld. CIT(A). The present appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT", for short) has been filed by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....earing for Revenue did not dispute the fact claimed by the Ld. AR of the assessee that the quantum addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- in respect of which the penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act; and which is disputed in the present appeal) has already been deleted by ITAT. However, she relied on the orders of the authorities below. (B.1) After hearing both s....