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 / TMI Blogs / RSS

2023 (1) TMI 366

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in retaining penalty u/s 271D of Rs. 2,17,11,192 out of Rs. 2,79,47,692. 2. The appellant submits that item wise explanation of 114 deposits spanning over 19 pages was prepared and culled from the seized books and records and not from the computerized books as has been mentioned by the learned CIT(A). 3. The appellant further submits this entire statement prepared and furnished was neither examined by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Baroda in remand proceedings though it was with him for seven months and the Assessing Officer at Surat though it was with him for two years and therefore, the details prepared by the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sangh Ltd. (3157/Ahd/2015). 4. In support of additional grounds of appeal, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that first and second additional grounds of appeal is purely legal in nature. No additional fact is to be brought on record for adjudicating the additional grounds of appeal. All facts for consideration of additional grounds of appeal are emanating from the orders of lower authorities. Both the additional grounds of appeal are purely legal in nature and goes to the root of the matter. To support his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) 229 ITR 383 (SC), West Bengal State Electricity Board (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for adjudicating such additional ground of appeal. The fact relating to adjudication of such second additional ground of appeal is emanating or apparent from the orders of lower authorities. Considering the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC (supra) wherein no new facts for adjudication of additional ground of appeal is required to be brought on record and/or the additional ground of appeal is purely legal in nature, may be admitted for adjudication. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid factual and legal discussion, the second additional ground of appeal raised by assessee is admitted for adjudication. Now adverting to the facts of the case. 7. Brief facts of the case are that the assessment in the present case was comple....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ile passing the assessment order on 31/12/2003 has not recorded any satisfaction about initiation of penalty under Section 271D of the Act. The ld. AR of the assessee carried us through the contents of assessment order and would submit that there is no whisper about the initiation of penalty under Section 271D or any whisper for making any reference for initiation of penalty under Section 271D of the Act. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (2015) 64 taxmann.com 75 (SC) held that wherein no satisfaction was recorded for initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271E, the impugned penalty order passed under said Section deserve to be set aside. The ld. AR submits that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee has nowhere raised such objection either at the time of penalty proceedings of at first appellate stage. 11. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the assessment order dated 31/12/2003. On careful perusal of the assessment order, we find that there is no whisper or reference in the assessment order about initiation of penalty under Section 271D. We further find that there is no whisper about making a reference to the Joint Commissioner or Additional commissioner for levying such penalty. We find that the Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT Vs Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (supra), while considering the similar questions of law held that when no satisfaction recording regarding penalty proceedings under Section ....