Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

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 / RSS

2022 (11) TMI 1495

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ramnath P Murkunde ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: These are the appeals filed by the assessee directed against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi ['the CIT(A)'] dated 01.09.2021 for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2012-13 respectively. 2. Since the identical facts and common issues are involved in both the ab....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icer accordingly formed an opinion that the cash deposits amounting to Rs.1,48,43,428/- had escaped to the tax and, therefore, issued notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on 29.03.2017 after recording the reasons. Thereafter, assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 28.12.2018 at total income @ 8% of the cash deposits made by the ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order confirmed the levy of penalty. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 7. Having heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that it is not fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271B merely because the appellant was unable to substantiate the submission that the ap....