9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment on the association of persons had no effect on the levy of penalty?" - assessee, submits that though finally the firm was found not genuine, but he has disclosed the income, therefore, there should be no penalty under section 271(1)(c) - When the assessee has furnished the inaccurate particulars of the income, there is nothing wrong in the order of the authorities below on the given facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the assessee is that the assessee was a partner in M/s. Ranu Brothers (Contracts) along with Shri Rajaram and Shri Rahul Bhargava. He had income from property also. He declared share income from M/s. Ranu Brothers (Contracts) at Rs. 35,028. The Income-tax Officer held that the firm Ranu Brothers (Contracts), which had closed, is not a genuine firm and the income earned in the name of firm M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals). Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Garg, learned counsel for the assessee, submits that though finally the firm was found not genuine, but he has disclosed the income, therefore, there should be no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mr. Singhi, learned counsel for the Department, submits that as the firm was not found genuine and he has not furnished ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
