9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1794X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly because the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer has been confirmed by this Tribunal is not conclusive to levy the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) as both the penalty proceedings as well as the quantum proceedings are independent from each other. We, therefore, allow the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee. - I.T.A .No.-1836/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 11-12-2015 - SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri C.S. Anand, Adv. For the Respondent : Sh. Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present penalty appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi vide his order dated 17/02/2015 for A.Y. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 71 was issued to the assessee on 30/12/2009. Even at the time of penalty proceedings the assessee has not furnished any details regarding the loan taken from different persons as well as any confirmation affidavits relating to the same. The ld. Assessing Officer, therefore, levied a penalty of ₹ 4,37,333/- for filing inaccurate particulars of income. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). It is submitted by the ld. AR that the quantum appeal filed by the assessee for the present assessment year has been disposed of by this Tribunal against which an MA has been preferred by the assessee. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and submissions by both the parties. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the notice issued u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) did not specify the limb under which the penalty proceedings has been initiated. The ld. CIT(A) in para 6.4 of his order records as under: 6.4 The view of ld. CIT(A) has been affirmed by the Hon ble ITAT. Therefore, there remains no suspicion that the appellant was in possession of unexplained cash amounting to ₹ 13,38,000/- which had surfaced in her bank account and ultimately got invested towards purchase of properties. The appellant definitely concealed her undisclosed income and tried to explain it as capital receipt in the form of loan or sale of jewellery. However, such explanation of the appellant remained unsubstantiated. The appellant s case is covered by all of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
