9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (3) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of tax as well as interest. The Tribunal upheld the order of Commissioner (Appeals). Held that- all the circumstances relied upon in the order of the Assessing Officer in the first instance and in appeal by the appellate authority, ought to have been but had not been evaluated by the Tribunal. Hence the matter remanded for fresh decision. - 24 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 30-3-2010 - CHANDRACHUD D. Y. DR., DEVADHAR J. P. JJ N.A. Kazi for the appellant. Anil Mishra for the appellant. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud J.-The appeal by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, arises out of an order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on July 28, 2006 for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 143(3) read with section 147 on March 19, 2003. By the order of the Assessing Officer, total income was computed at Rs. 30,12,440 after making an addition of Rs. 25,21,000 on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e). A notice to show cause was issued to the assessee for imposition of a penalty under section 271(1)©. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty in the amount of Rs. 10,08,400, following which an appeal was filed by the assessee. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal and ordered deletion of the penalty. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the appellate authority by its order dated July 28, 2006, which is impugned in this appeal. 3. The only ground which has weighed with the Tribunal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany had sufficient accumulated profit. (6) The credit balance of the firm was not debited at all and the amounts are shown as outstanding as against the directors in the accounts of the company. (7) The advances/loans received by the assessee during the year 1994-95, i.e., the assessment year 1995-96 to the tune of Rs. 74,37,000 has been utilised by the assessee for the benefit of his relatives, wife, children and associated concerns by way of advance/loans and investments in shares." 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), while ordering the deletion of the penalty accepted the contention of the assessee that he had acted under a bona fide belief that all the loans and advances obtained from the company were disclosed in the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
