9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .5% of such purchases. This a clear cut case where the income has been estimated by applying a percentage of 12.5% and therefore the penalty under section 271(1)(c) can not be imposed. We are, therefore, setting aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.2408/M/2018 - - - Dated:- 20-5-2019 - Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 24.03.2015 assessing the income at ₹ 20,45,180/- as against the return of income of ₹ 3,91,034/- by adding ₹ 16,54,146/- on account of bogus purchases. The penalty proceedings were also initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of two particulars of income in the assessment order by issuing penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ench of the Tribunal in ITA No.2409/M/2018 A.Y. 2009-10 vide order dated 19.12.2018 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee in quantum by directing the AO to apply a profit rate of 12.5% on the said bogus purchases and thus the Ld. A.R. submitted that it is a case of estimation of income on which the penalty is not imposable. This is a clear cut case of difference of opinion as the AO added 100% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rchases. In our opinion, this is a clear cut case where the income has been estimated by applying a percentage of 12.5% and therefore the penalty under section 271(1)(c) can not be imposed. We are, therefore, setting aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
