9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e concealment is unsustainable in law, if the estimation of profits involved and no specific relatable income is precisely quantified. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the orders of the CIT(A) in these 4 appeals are fair in deleting the penalty. See Bhagyalaxmi Steel Alloys Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (1) TMI 1081 - ITAT PUNE] and Shree Om Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd [2018 (1) TMI 1073 - ITAT PUNE] - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA Nos.161 & 162/PUN/2016, ITA No.164/PUN/2016, ITA No.167/PUN/2016 - - - Dated:- 17-11-2017 - SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM Revenue by : Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR ORDER PER BENCH : There are 4 appeals filed by the Revenue under consideration involving 3 different assessees f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons based on the electricity consumption is concerned. However, Ld. DR mentioned that the Tribunal needs to appreciate the fact that the assessee is engaged in the unaccounted production of the goods and unaccounted sale of the same. Considering the concealment of the facts, as per Ld. DR, the profit relatable to such unaccounted sale constitute concealed income and the penalty to that extent is required to be sustained in the Tribunal. Further, he also mentioned that on identical issues and the argument of Ld. DR for the Revenue the penalty was deleted by the Tribunal in the cases of ACIT Vs. Bhagyalaxmi Steel Alloys Pvt. Ltd. vide ITA Nos. 990 and 991/PUN/2015 order dated 18-10-2017, ACIT Vs. Shree Om Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. vide ITA No.9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A). We therefore find the order of the CIT(A) to be a reasoned one and accordingly affirm the same. Therefore, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. In the case of ACIT Vs. Shree Om Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra) also the Pune Bench of the Tribunal (where both of us are parties) held as under : 11. We heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue as well as the written submissions of the assessee. The deletion of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the estimated additions is a decided issue. There are many judgments to support the same. Therefore, in principle, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) and delete the penalty relatable to the estimated addition. 12. However, with regard to the penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stimation. In our view, the said presumption is fair and reasonable. In any case, nothing is brought to our notice by the Ld. DR to demonstrate the estimations are not involved both in arriving at the figure of unrecorded sales and the taxable income. For our mind, it appears that the income of ₹ 76,48,922/- is also the product of estimation and the same is accepted by the AO/CIT(A)/ITSC. Therefore, it constitutes a reasonable presumption by the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of CIT(A) is fair and reasonable for the said reasons too. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 6. From the above extracted portions of the order of the Tribunal, we find the Ld. DR s argument that the profit relatable to the unaccounted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
