Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

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 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2023 (7) TMI 1388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short "Ld. CIT(A)"), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (in short "NFAC"), Delhi on 13.03.2023 for A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "1. The learned C.I.T.(Appeals) grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming the penalty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome declaring income of Rs. 16,270/- after claiming exemption under Section 10(38) for a sum of Rs. 3,80,400/- being Long Term Capital Gain (in short "LTCG") earned by the assessee on the sale of shares of M/s. DEvika Proteins Limited on the ground that they were held by him for more than one year, and thereafter, sold the same through stock exchange enabling him to offer the aforesaid exemption. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as such but has claimed the LTCG as per the details filed in return of income. Therefore, the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is not justifiable. 6. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order, penalty order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that in the assessment order it....