Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (11) TMI 1878

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short]. First we shall take quantum appeal for adjudication. 2. Both the appeals filed against quantum addition as well as penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by the assessee are delayed by 11 days and 111 days respectively, for which, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed a petition in support of an affidavit for condonation of the delay, to which; the ld. DR has not raised any serious objection. Consequently, since the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause, the delays in filing of both the appeals are condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual his filed return of income for the assessment y....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Since the assessee could not produce the source of this credit, the AR of the assessee agreed to the addition of Rs..11,79,120/- during the course of assessment proceedings and accordingly, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs..11,79,120/- under section 68 of the Act. Further, against the claim of various expenses, since the assessee was not able to substantiate properly, the AR of the assessee agreed for estimating the income @ 2% on the turnover and also agreed to pay the resultant tax demand. The turnover of the assessee during the year was Rs..21,59,18,234/- and 2% thereof works out to Rs..43,18,365/-. Out of this, the assessee has already admitted Rs..17,02,167/- and the balance works out to Rs..26,16,198/- was brought to tax. On ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....kshi Kutty 258 ITR 494, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that penalty cannot be levied where additions are made on estimate basis and prayed for deleting the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 6.1 We have heard rival contentions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below including various decisions filed by the assessee. Based on the quantum additions, the Assessing Officer levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that had there been no scrutiny in this case, the concealed income would have gone untaxed and moreover the assessee has not paid the tax demanded and no ....