2025 (7) TMI 1420

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), dated 22.10.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 17.03.2015. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: "The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another. The Id. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in confirming penalty of Rs. 5,99,530/-, on the addition made on estimated basis on the alleged ground, unexplained income of Rs. 19,68,993/-, in guise of agriculture income. The penalty levied and confirmed unjustified and uncalled for, which may kindly be deleted. Your Honour's assessee craves leave to add, to amend, alter....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who has confirmed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, imposed by the assessing officer, therefore, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 5. Learned Counsel for the assessee, argued that the assessing officer has imposed penalty on estimated addition. The ld.Counsel, took us through the paper book (PB) Page no.23, wherein in assessee's own case, in a quantum proceedings, the Tribunal has estimated the addition in ITA No.06/RJT/2017 for AY 2012-13, vide order dated 27.90.2017 and allowed the appeal of the assessee, partly, observing as follows: "4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival submissions. The sole issue that arises for our adj....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be 3000 kg. per hectare in the relevant previous year on ad hoc basis. The Assessing Officer is directed to frame consequential computation enhancing the CIT(A)'s estimation from Rs. 2000/- kg. per hectare to Rs. 3000/- kg. per hectare as per law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It is made clear that our instant estimation shall not be in any way be treated as a precedent in preceding or succeeding assessment year." 6. Therefore, the ld. Counsel for the assessee, argued that in quantum proceedings, the Tribunal has re-estimated the addition sustained by the learned CIT(A), and in fact, order of Ld. CIT (A) is also based on estimation. The ld. Counsel submitted that the penalty on estimated addition sho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....#39;ble ITAT, in quantum processing, is on estimate basis, hence no penalty could be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 9. Therefore, we have observed that the entire issue revolves around the addition of 19,68,993/-. Neither the AO, nor CIT(A) and nor the Hon'ble ITAT has given a finding that the details furnished by the assessee is found to be incorrect or erroneous or false and as such question of initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, does not arise. In order to justify levy of penalty there must be some material or circumstances leading to reasonable conclusion that the amount of conscious concealment or act of furnishing of inaccurate particulars. Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has in the case of National Textiles vs....