2025 (4) TMI 665

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d default to concealment of particulars without appreciating the facts of the case. Your appellant prays for deletion of this penalty. 2. Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of natural justice." 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a cooperative society doing banking business and has filed its return of income on 14.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs. 3,14,58,269/- which was processed u/s 143(1) and thereafter the case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was finalized by an order dated 20.03.2014 by determining total income at Rs. 3,18,06,634/-. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....order, after considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC partly allowed the appeal of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to re-calculate the quantum of penalty after reducing Rs. 1,86,946/- from total disallowance of Rs. 17,85,134/-. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR further submitted before us that the originally penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed on the basis of three additions i.e. nondeduction of TDS on interest payment disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of Rs. 5,31,481/-, disallowance for claiming deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) of Rs. 10,66,707/- an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that originally penalty was imposed for three additions out of which one addition of Rs. 1,86,946/- regarding estimated disallowance of expenses it was directed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC that the penalty cannot be imposed on the basis of estimated addition. Second addition of Rs. 5,31,481/- i.e. disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) has already been deleted by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in quantum case of the assessee for the same assessment year. Accordingly, we find that the basis of imposition of penalty to the extent of Rs. 5,31,481/- + Rs. 1,86,946/- does not survive. Now, according to Ld. DR penalty needs to be imposed ....