9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rajendra, AM Challenging the orders, dtd 22. 1. 13 of CIT(A)-40 Mumbai the assessee has filed the appeals for the above mentioned AY. s . assessee-company is engaged in the business of computer software and automation. The effective GOA for all the AY. s is identical i. e. levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c ) of the Act. For the sake of convenience, we are adjudicating all the appeals by a single order. ITA/2337/M/2013-AY 2002-03: 2. An action u/s. 132/133A was carried out on 6. 9. 2007 in the business premises of the assessee-group. During the search and survey proceedings certain documents were impounded/seized. A notce u/s. 153A was issued to the assessee on 23. 8. 2008. In response to the notice a return of income was filed on 24. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a penalty of ₹ 2, 63, 470/- as per the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the penalty order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the FAA, who confirmed the order of the AO. 4. During the course of hearing before us, the Authorised Representative(AR)stated that quantum additions made/upheld by the AO/FAA were challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal, that the ITAT had allowed the appeal of the assessee and that had reversed the order of the FAA. (ITA2383-2385/ Mum/ 2011-AY2002-03 to 2004-05, dt. 16. 7. 15). The Departmental Representative(DR)left the issue to the discretion of the Bench. We find that the disallowance made by the AO with regard to depreciation on goodwill, was deleted b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al found during the search for making the impugned disallowances/additions. The ratio laid down by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court (supra) squarely apply on the facts of the case wherein the Hon ble High Court has held as under: Held, dismissing the appeals, (i) that the notice u/s. 153A was founded on search. If there was no incriminating material found during the search then the Tribunal was right in holding that the power u/s. 153A being not expected to be exercised routinely, should be exercised if the search revealed any incriminating material. If that was not found then in relation to the second phase of three years, there was no warrant for making an order within the meaning of this provisions. Respectfully follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
