2018 (10) TMI 2037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gson, Sr. DR ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.02.2015 passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-24, New Delhi for A.Y. 2005-06 wherein vide the impugned order, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has upheld the levy of penalty amounting to Rs. 2,67,390/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lty proceedings culminated in imposition of penalty of Rs. 2,67,390/- which was upheld by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A) on appeal. 2.1 Now, the assessee is before the ITAT challenging the upholding of penalty by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A). 3.0 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has been maintaining regular books of accounts with respect to the hire charges and mainten....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed the material available on record. The only question for our consideration is whether penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is sustainable with respect to disallowance which has been partially deleted by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A) on ad hoc/estimated basis. It is undisputed in the present appeal that the quantification of the alleged concealment/inaccurate particulars is only an estimate and it is s....