9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee and deleting the penalty is thus warranted - in favour of assessee. - IT(SS)A No. 24/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 15-6-2012 - SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL AND SHRI RAJENDRA JJ. Revenue by : Shri M. Murali O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, J.M. This appeal preferred by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 14-12-2010 passed by the ld. CIT (A) - 1, Thane for the Block Period 01-04-95 to 27-09-2001 cancelling the penalty of Rs. 3,02,261/- imposed by the A.O. u/s 158 BFA(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. At the time of hearing, none attended on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application for the adjournment of the case, therefore, it was decided to dispose of the appeal ex parte, qua the assessee, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able. In support, the reliance was also placed on various decisions. However, the A.O. did not accept the assessee s explanation. He was of the view that undisclosed income determined by the A.O. is in excess of the income shown in the return filed by the assessee, therefore, the assessee is liable to penalty and accordingly he imposed penalty of Rs. 3,02,261/- vide order dtd. 26-6-2009 passed u/s 158 BFA (2) of the Act. 4. On the same date i.e. 26-6-2009, the assessee has filed an application u/s 154 wherein it was pointed out that there was a mistake in the computation in the total income. As per the assessee, the A.O. wrongly started the computation part with returned undisclosed income as against net profit as per profit/loss account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accordingly cancelled the penalty imposed by the A.O. 6. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before us challenging in both the grounds the deletion of penalty imposed by the A.O. 7. At the time of hearing the ld. D.R. supports the order of the A.O. 8. We have carefully considered the submissions of the ld. D.R. and perused the material available on record. We find the facts are not in dispute inasmuch as it is also not in dispute that after giving effect to the order dtd. 6-8-2010 of the ld. CIT(A) passed against the appeal filed by the assessee u/s 154 of the Act, the final undisclosed income of the assessee has been determined at Rs. 55 lacs as disclosed by the assessee in the return. Even otherw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
