2019 (2) TMI 354 - AT - Income Tax

Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Held that - As noted by CIT(A) that assessee has not filed any appeal against the addition made and accordingly accepted the quantum addition made by the AO. Ld. CIT(A) after referring to various judgments including the judgment of Hon ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Mak Data Vs. CIT 2013 (11) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT , upheld the penalty order. He has given a categorical finding on page No. 13 of his order that assessee has failed to prove the genuineness and bonafides of the transactions in dispute. In the light of the facts of the present case, I find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A). - decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2010-11.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the AY 2010-11. The notice of hearing was sent to the assessee, but they did not appear, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Revenue supported the order of the CIT(A). The only issue in dispute was the penalty of ?2,15,400 under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee did not appeal against the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld the penalty order. Citing various judgments, including the one from the Hon'ble Apex Court, the CIT(A) found that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness and bonafides of the transactions in question. The ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating no reason to interfere with it. Consequently, the grounds raised by the assessee were rejected, and the appeal was dismissed. The order was pronounced on February 1, 2019.