2024 (2) TMI 1386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeal: "1.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c), though the notice u/s 274 had been issued in mechanical manner in pre-printed form, without intimating the charge as to whether the penalty is proposed to be levied for 'Concealment of income' or 'Furnishing inaccurate particulars of income'; 2.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c), though the initiation of penalty in the assessment order had been made without any charge of 'Concealment of income' or 'Furnishing inaccurate particulars of income' 3.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....allowances of aggregate purchases of Rs. 8.78 Crore. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the addition was restricted to 5% of the whole of the purchase shown by the assessee. On further appeal before the Tribunal, by assessee as well as revenue, the additions/ disallowances was restricted to the extent of disputed purchases only in order dated 18/07/2019 passed in ITA No. 2932 and 3277/Ahd/2016. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that admittedly, the addition in the quantum assessment was ultimately restricted/upheld on estimation basis. It is settled law that in the income tax proceedings, no penalty is leviable on addition made on estimated additions. So the penalty levied by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. To support his subm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... income ultimately the stand of department is upheld in restricting the addition to the extent of 5%. Therefore, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act should be upheld qua the addition upheld in the quantum assessment proceedings. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities carefully. We have also perused material on record. We have also deliberated on various case laws. We find that initially the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 21/12/2009 assessing total income at Rs. 7,02,370/- against the income declared at Rs. 3,26,280/-. Subsequently, the case of assessee was reopened under section 147 on the basis of information received from ....