Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1106 - ITAT AHMEDABADPenalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - additions made u/s 68 - Held that:- For levy of penalty there has to be evidence or material to show that the Assessee has deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of income. It also a settled law that penalty proceedings are entirely distinct from assessment proceedings and howsoever relevant and good the findings in assessment proceedings may be, they are not conclusive as far as penalty proceedings are considered. It is also well settled that the parameters of judging the justification for addition made in assessment case of an assessee is different from the penalty imposed on account of concealment of income or filing inaccurate particular of income and that certain disallowances/additions could legally be made in assessment proceedings on the preponderance of probabilities but no penalty could be imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on the preponderance of probabilities and the Revenue has to prove that the claim made by the Assessee was not genuine. In the present case LD. AR has placed on paper book the table of documentary evidence filed in respect of sundry creditors like ledger accounts, purchase bills, confirmations and has thus discharged the initial onus cast upon the Assessee. On such evidences furnished no inquiry was conducted by AO. The purchases from the creditors and the corresponding sales have not been doubted. Before us, Revenue has not brought any material to controvert the submissions of Assessee. Considering the totality of the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that in the present case penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) could not be levied - Decided in favour of assessee
|