9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of penalty, that fact alone was not sufficient and the burden was on the department to prove concealment of income which was not discharged by the department - in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 1713/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 5-10-2012 - Shri A.K. Garodia, And Shri Kul Bharat, JJ. Department by : Shri Rahul Kumar, Sr. D.R. Assessee by : Shri G.C. Pipara, A.R. ORDER PER : A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member This is Revenue s appeal directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XI, Ahmedabad dated 17.03.2010 for assessment year 2003-04. 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue are as under:- 1. The ld. CIT(A)-XI, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c ) of Rs.3,93,321/-. 2. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is therefore, leviable on the amount of additions/disallowances cofirmed by the CIT(A)-XI, Ahmedabad, which works out to Rs.10,99,075/-, i.e. Rs.10,02,743/- on account of GP estimation and Rs.65,718/- on account of deferred revenue expenditure. 4. From the above facts of the case, it is established that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of its income and therefore the assessee is liable for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 5. In response to the show cause notice issued as discussed in preceding paras, the assessee has not furnished any explanation in connection with the default of furnishing inaccurate particulars of its income. It is, therefore, concluded that the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs.46.51 lacs and the addition confirmed is only of Rs17,74,615/- We also find that G.P. rate was estimated by the A.O. @ 32% and turn over was estimated at Rs.5 crores as per Tribunal order, the estimation of turn over was scaled down to Rs. 3.75 crores from Rs.5 crores estimated by the A.O. and the rate of G.P. was also scaled down to 30% as against 32% estimated by the A.O. In the light of these facts, we examine the applicability of the judgment of Hon ble Gujarat High Court cited by ld. A.R. of the assessee having been rendered in the case of Jumabhai Premchand (supra). In that case, addition was made by the A.O. by estimating the household expenditure of the assessee being very low as per the A.O. and on such addition penalty was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
