9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration. Accordingly we allow the claim of assessee on the ground of legality and validity of Penalty order for all the years under consideration. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 5474 – 5475 - 5476/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 29-5-2019 - Smt. Beena A Pillai, Judicial Member And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sh. Ajit Gandhi, C.A. For the Department : Sh. S.N.Pandey, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present Penalty appeals has been filed by assessee against order dated 21/06/12 passed by Ld. CIT (A)-16, New Delhi for assessment years 1998-99 to 2001-02 on following grounds of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,575/- disregarding the explanation of the appellant. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) as the appellant had neither furnished inaccurate particulars of its income nor concealed its income. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. ITA No. 5476/Del/2012 AY 2001-02 1. The order of the CIT(A) in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 27(1)(c) amounting to ₹ 88,688/- is arbitrary, biased, bad in law and facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uantum order passed by Ld.CIT(A)-XXIV, and this Tribunal remanded appeals back to Ld.AO for fresh assessment, as done in other group cases of assessee. It has been submitted that due to misplacement of records, said order was neither received by assessee nor by concerned Ward of ITO and that as on date Ld.AR submits that assessee is unable to get copy of such order by this Tribunal. 2.3. Be that as it may, Ld.AR submitted that in the mean while, Ld.AO issued penalty notice to assessee in respect of all assessment years under consideration. Ld. AO was of opinion that onus was on assessee to establish failure to return correct income did not arise from any fraud or any gross or willful neglect on his part. And since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome. 5.3 . On the contrary Ld.Sr.DR submitted that, assessee has been charged with both concealment as well as filing inaccurate particulars of income by Ld.AO and therefore the penalty order cannot be considered to be bad in law. 5.4. He submitted that, explanation offered by assessee has not been accepted, and therefore under Explanation 1 of section 271 (1) (c) of the Act, penalty levied deserves to be upheld. 6. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 7. In the present case, penalty has been initiated on the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars, but Ld.AO levied penalty on c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
