TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 464
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.The ld. AO was not justified in passing the order, which is bad in law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 2.The ld. CIT(A) was not justi9fied in confirming the order which is bad in law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 3. The ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,19,85,920/- against the penalty u/s 270A. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal." 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee-company filed its return of income for assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18 on 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In reply, the assessee submitted that loss incurred on account of claim and settlement was normal business loss and requested not to impose penalty in respect of such disallowances. The reply of assessee was not accepted by assessing officer, the assessing officer concluded that during assessment, the assessee agreed with the action of assessing officer for making disallowance of expenses. Further, the assessee declared loss. By declaring loss, the assessee was not required to pay tax. Making addition, the fact is reducing the assesses claim to the extent of Rs. 9,31,347/-. The ld. AO held that in his case, the provision of section 270A is clearly applicable. The AO accordingly levied the penalty under section 270A @50% of tax liability fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anged the sub-head of income. The assessee is engaged in trading of commodities. During the period relevant to financial year for assessment year under consideration, the assessee in normal course of business in trading in commodities, settled forward contract for purchase and sale of commodities wherein assessee incurred loss of Rs. 87.83 crore. Loss was debited to profit and loss account while preparing accounts. Loss was a normal business loss shown in the return of income. Admittedly, no appeal was filed in quantum assessment. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that assessment order passed by assessing officer is not only erroneous but arbitrary. The additions / disallowances made only to reduce the claim of loss. There could not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... authorities. The ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that assessing officer as well as ld. CIT(A) passed a detail order and he fully supports. On similar line, the ld. CIT-DR of the revenue also filed his written submission narrating the finding of AO/ ld. CIT(A). 7. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We also deliberated on various case laws relied by ld. AR of the assessee. The treatment of loss of disallowance thereof is discussed in preceding paras which is not repeated here for the sake of brevity. The core and crucial issue for our consideration is, if the business loss suffered and claimed by assessee in its computation of income, which was n....