9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not disputed by the learned D.R. when the property at Annanagar could not be included in the net wealth of the assessee, in our view there cannot be any concealment so as to levy penalty under sec.18(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the very same property. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.376 to 381 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 24-2-2015 - R. Sudhakar And R. Karuppiah,JJ. Fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vive as a stand alone. 3. Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue on the above submission. 4. It is seen from the order of the Tribunal that the Revenue has filed the appeals before the Tribunal challenging the deletion of penalty alone in respect of the property at Anna Nagar. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that in the quantum appeal, the Tribunal deleted the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame property. Therefore, in our considered view, the CIT(Appeals) has rightly deleted the penalty. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(Appeals) on this issue. Accordingly, the same is confirmed. In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. 5. In the light of the above, when the additions have been deleted by the Tribunal and the same has not bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
