2023 (10) TMI 440

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing ex-parte order without granting sufficient opportunity o being heard to the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Leaned Assessing Officer in levying a penalty without specifying the limb whether it is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in levying a penalty of Rs. 2,15,053/- u/s 271(1)(c) for Income Tax Act, 1961, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. On the facts and circumstances of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....production of party with regard to the purchases made by the assessee from the following parties:- 1. Somnath International Rs. 5,65,313/- 2. Vidhi & Vrushti Trade Pvt Ltd Rs. 51,69,433/- 3. After verifying the details submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer concluded that the purchases from these parties are not genuine for the reason that the assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence to support the purchases. Accordingly the Assessing Officer applied 12.50% towards the rate of profit to make an addition of Rs. 7,16,843/- while completing the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) by issuing a show cause notic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s levied are genuine transactions that have been account for in the books of account and paid through normal banking channel. Therefore, it was submitted that there was no concealment of income warranting penalty. 5. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the order of the lower authorities. 6. We heard the parties and perused the materials on record. In the quantum appeal we notice that the addition is made in assessee's case as a percentage of bogus purchases i.e. by applying 12.50% towards gross profit on the bogus purchases. The Assessing officer while levying penalty has applied the minimum tax rate on the gross profit estimated by the Assessing Officer. The main contention of the ld AR is that when profit is arrived at on an estima....