9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BADAR DURREZ AHMED J.—We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present appeal, preferred by the Revenue, is directed against the order dated April 30, 2009, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, in penalty proceedings relating to the assessment year 1994-95. 3. It may be pointed out at the outset that in so far as the quantum proceedings are concerned, additions had been made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income-tax (Appeals). However, in the appeal preferred by the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has deleted the said penalty. 5. In so far as change of treatment from business loss as claimed by the assessee to speculation loss as determined by the Assessing Officer, the Tribunal was of the view that a mere change of treatment of the said loss would not amount to concealment under s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 4 lakhs to the assessee had accepted that the cheque in question had been given by it. The only difference being that it maintained that it was not given as loan, whereas the assessee had shown it as a loan. It was on this account that the Assessing Officer had made the quantum of addition. However, the Tribunal felt this treatment by the assessee did not warrant penalty under section 271(1)(c) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Securities Pvt. Ltd. to the assessee out of the fund of Rs. 25 lakhs said to be received by that company from M/s. Model Trading Co. Prop. Urmilla Batra and it is noted by the Assessing Officer that Shri Madhup Jam, director of M/s. Sujata Securities Pvt. Ltd. has stated in his statement that he does not remember the address of M/s. Model Trading Co. which create serious doubt about the genuinene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
