9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2497X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nangia ORDER PER H.L.KARWA, VP This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of CIT(A), Chandigarh dated 16.07.2014 in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 61,13,801/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') relating to assessment year 2010-11. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer issued a show cause notice to the assessee and in response to the same, the assessee submitted its reply on 20.6.2013 stating that the counsel of the assessee filed revised computation during the assessment proceedings because the revised return was not acceptable through E-filing. There was no intention to conceal the income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessing off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was of the then Counsel and moreover, it cannot be said that anyone had benefitted by not adding back the impugned amounts, since the appellant co-operative society is an undertaking of Government of Punjab. The explanation furnished by the appellant is bonafide and so the impugned penalty levied is cancelled. Grounds of appeal taken by the appellant are allowed." 4. We have heard Shri Vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... correctly observed that the mistake of not adding back the impugned amounts in the statement of income was of the then counsel and moreover it cannot be said that anyone had been benefitted by not adding back the impugned amount, since the assessee is an undertaking of Government of Punjab. In our opinion, the order of CIT(A) is based on appreciation of facts and therefore, we decline to interfere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
