9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty of Rs. 45,100/- imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called 'the Act') in relation to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in trading of cement. Closing stock of Rs. 3,85,580/- was shown in the audited balance sheet. The AO, during the course of assessment proceedings, observed that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the rate of last purchase bill dated 28.3.2009. But, for that, there is nothing to show that the assessee, in fact, concealed his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. There can be several reasons for a different valuation. It is not necessary that all the bags are always of good quality. Some of the cement bags may have leaked, spoilt or fixed. 4. It is an admitted position t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt bags vide last purchase bill dated 28.3.2009. Apart from this estimate made by the AO, there is nothing to show that the way in which the assessee valued its closing stock was incorrect. This divulges that the addition has been made only on the basis of estimate made by the AO. It is a settled legal position that when income is estimated, then, there can be no question of imposing penalty u/s 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
