9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... – AO is right in levying the penalty with regard to the cash credit of Rs.1,50,000/- relating to Mr. Mathew and the same is hereby confirmed. - ITA No. 2362/Ahd/2009, CO No. 24/Ahd/2013 (Arising out of ITA No.2362/Ahd/2009) - - - Dated:- 27-9-2013 - Shri B. P. Jain And Shri Kul Bharat,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri K. C. Mathews, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri M. K. Patel, A. R. ORDER Per Shri B. P. Jain, Accountant Member :- This appeal of the Revenue arises from the order of learned CIT(A)-II, Surat, dated 22.05.2009 for the assessment year 2005-06. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of the appeal, reproduced as under: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-II ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Sec. 68 of the Act. (iii) Rs.61,33,780/- On account of unexplained Sundry Creditors. 3.1 The assessee has furnished in accurate particulars of income in respect of aforesaid additions/disallowances. The AO had, therefore, initiated and levied a penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO had levied a penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act of Rs.42,60,153/- on the concealed income of Rs.1,16,42,153/- on the following grounds. (a) During the course of assessment and penalty proceedings, the assessee had, on being specifically requested for, neither attended nor had furnished any positive or constructive evidences to prove the outstanding credits shown in the books of account. (b) During the course of 'assessment' and 'penalty' proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late order No.CAS/II/450/07-08 dated. 26.11.2008 in the quantum appeal'. 2. The penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act of Rs.42,60,153/- is therefore, restricted to Rs.21,43,600/- based on the 'reduced concealed income' as per quantum appellate order dated 26.11.2008. 3.3 Learned CIT(A) has directed the AO to restrict the levy of such penalty to the unexplained cash credit of Rs.3 lacs and Rs.4,66,093/- and in respect unexplained and non verifiable creditors to the tune of Rs.50,91,930/-. 4. Learned counsel for the assessee, Mr. M.K. Patel, at the outset, invited our attention to the decision of ITAT Ahmedabad 'D' Bench in ITA 502/Ahd/2009 and ITA 566/Ahd/2009, dated 06.01.2012 in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2005-06, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. 5. Learned DR, on the other hand, agreed to the arguments made by the learned counsel for the assessee with regard to the additions deleted by the ITAT or Department's appeal dismissed by the ITAT in assessee's own case in quantum orders being ITA Nos.502/Ahd/2009 and 566/Ahd/2009 (supra). Learned D.R. further argued that the matter with regard to the set aside issue be also set aside instead of cancelling the penalty. He further argued that the penalty with regard to Rs.1,50,000/- which has been confirmed by the ITAT should be confirmed since no details have been placed on record by the assessee before any of the authorities below or even before this Bench. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
