2026 (3) TMI 1018

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. At the outset, we observe, present appeal is delayed by 10 days. Seeking condonation of delay, the assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit. It is the say of the assessee that due to heavy rains on 15th and 16th August, 2025 his office was flooded, resulting in damage to computer systems and records. It is submitted, being a practicing Chartered Accountant, the assessee also had the added responsibility of completing the audit and filing income tax returns of his clients before 31st October, 2025, which subsequently got extended up to 10th November, 2025. He submitted, due to this reason filing of appeal got delayed by 10 days. 3. Having considered the submissions of the assessee, we are satisfied that the delay i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nscious attempt to furnish inaccurate particulars of income. However, rejecting the explanation of the assessee, the Assessing Officer proceeded to pass an order imposing penalty of Rs. 6,17,612/- alleging furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Assessee, being unsuccessful in getting the penalty deleted before learned First Appellate Authority, has come before us. 5. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee reiterated the stand taken before Departmental Authorities. Whereas, learned Departmental Representative submitted, the assessee offered additional income only after receiving the notice of the Assessing Officer. He submitted, had assessee's case not been selected for scrutiny, the additional income offered by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 13,34,368/- claimed against income from Futures and Options (F&O) business and added back to the income of the assessee. After setting off brought forward loss, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of Rs. 27,11,440/-, the very same figure at which the assessee offered the total income in the revised computation of income. In other words, there is no variation between the income determined by the Assessing Officer and as offered by the assessee in the revised computation of income. Undoubtedly, the Assessing Officer had initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act alleging furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and has ultimately imposed penalty under the very same limb. Whereas, it is the ....