9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. DR. The crux of argument on behalf of the assessee is that the assessee declared trading loss of Rs.48,70,920/- which arose mainly on account of valuation of stock at realisable value. It was explained that the assessee made sale of Rs.6,32,204/- out of such stock and the remaining stock was valued by the assessee at Rs.1,42,600/- as the resalable value of such stock remained to that extent only. It was contended that it was the first venture of the assessee. The ld. Assessing Officer disallowed the trading loss of Rs.48,70,970/- which was contested before the ld. CIT(A). It was explained that the ld. first appellate authority reduced the trading loss to Rs.25 lakhs. The ld. Assessing Officer was argued to be unjustified in imposition o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the penalty proceeding is also germane out of quantum proceedings. At the same time, it is also wellsettled that for imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, either there should be concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. It was observed by the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee had only given the opening stock value and closing stock value of 64 commodities without explaining as to how most of the commodities remained of no value at the end of the accounting year. Admittedly, some of the commodities are having longer life and remains saleable and some commodities are perishable in nature. The assessee did not produce any explanation with supporting evidence. It has specifically been noticed in the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... particulars of income and/or (b) furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. Whether the income returned was a profit or a loss was really of no consequence. Therefore, even if no tax was payable, penalty was still liable....................." There is finding in the assessment order that it is a case where the sales are made to the parties which were not identifiable, therefore, the claim of the assessee, prima facie appears to be non-genuine. There is no explanation as to how the opening stock of Rs.55,23,532/-, after the sales of Rs.6,37,204/-, reduced to Rs.1,42,600/-. The assessee has also not filed any appeal against the quantum addition of Rs.25 lakhs. If the totality of the facts are analysed, we find that the necessary ingre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
