9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 896X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the same is liable to be cancelled. In the result, the ground taken by the Revenue is dismissed. - ITA. No. 454/JP/2017 - - - Dated:- 18-1-2018 - SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM For The Revenue : Shri P. P. Meena (JCIT) For The Assessee : Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Kota dated 27.03.2017 for Assessment Year 2007-08 wherein the Revenue has challenged the action of the ld CIT(A) in deleting the penalty amounting to ₹ 26,95,277/-. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee has reported gross receipt of ₹ 41,14,68,583/- and N.P rate of 9.73% (subjec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 5 years, the addition made by the AO was sustained to the extent of ₹ 3,00,000/- to plug the leakage of revenue as against the original addition of ₹ 25,95,796/- made by the AO. 5. In the impugned penalty order dated 24.03.2015 passed by the AO and not by the ld CIT(A), apparently before the receipt of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench on 30.05.2017, the AO observed that the ld. CIT(A) has upheld the rejection of books of accounts and an addition of ₹ 80,07,358/- has been made including the enhancement of income by ₹ 54,11,562/-. It was also stated by the AO that in the said order, the ld. CIT(A) also directed the AO to issue notice u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act. The AO observed that it is clearly establishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such addition, no penalty was leviable. Taking the above legal authorities into consideration, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty and his findings are reproduced as below: In view of the above facts and legal precedents available in this regard, I am of the opinion that the penalty has been wrongly imposed in this case invoking the provisions of section 271(1)(c) by the A.O when it should have been imposed by the CIT(A) in reference to the findings on enhancement given by him in the course of the quantum appellate proceedings. The penalty of ₹ 26,95,277/- on the additional income of ₹ 80,07,358/- is accordingly directed to be deleted. This Ground of appeal is allowed. 7. At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
