2025 (3) TMI 2197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w No.18, Old No.22, Lake Area, 1st Cross Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34. [PAN: AAGCP2703C] DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 /1064270562(1) dated 22.04.2025 Income Tax Officer, Corp Ward-5(2), Chennai. 2 ITA-1851 / Chny / 2024 2014-15 DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 /1064270777(1) dated 22.04.2025 3 ITA-1864 / Chny / 2024 2015-16 DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 /1064271009(1) dated 22.04.2025 4 ITA-1865 / Chny / 2024 2016-17 DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1064271181(1) dated 22.04.2025 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 14 days in all the four appeals, in filing before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assessee has pleade....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ence action u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 was taken. In response to notice of the Ld.AO the assessee had submitted that it has discontinued its operations and was not in the possession of adequate records to file return of income or any further information. Reference was also made to assessee's contemporaneous adverse health issues. The Ld. AO recorded that department has initiated action for restoration of company's name in the registrar of companies. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.AO proceeded to draw his assumptions and presumptions and completed assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 147 estimating total income of the assessee at Rs. 35, 69, 538/-. The Ld. Counsel submitted that for want of adequate resources at its disposal, the impugne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....missible beyond three years. Thus, the quantum addition per se was challenged by the assessee. It was argued that once the foundation being assessment order looses ground, the super structure of penalty automatically fails. The Ld. Counsel further argued that it is an undisputed fact on records that, in the present case the addition has been made by the Ld. AO on estimate basis. It was argued that it has been held in a catena of judgements that no penalty for any concealment u/s 271(1)(c) is leviable in cases where estimated additions have been made. In support of its contentions, the Ld. Counsel placed reliance upon following judgements:- "....i) Super Tech Construction Company vs ACIT ITAT Mumbai in ITA No. 910/Mum/2023 dated 05/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....conceal an income. In the instant case the income deemed to have been concealed has been determined on the basis of guess or estimate of the Ld. AO. Irrespective as to the justification or reasonableness to draw such estimates, the assessee cannot be subjected to any concealment penalty for such estimates. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) imposed by the Ld. AO for AY-2013-14 vide order dated 22.08.2023 and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained. We therefore set aside the order of the lower authorities and direct the Ld.AO to delete the impugned penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Rs. 11,02,988/-. All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed. 6.0 Both the parties have admi....