9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-25, Mumbai dt. 19.3.2013 pertaining to Assessment year 2004-05. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty made u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The previous history show that inspite of the service of the notice, the assessee did not attend the proceedings nor any Authorised R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods which was given in the audit report without any quantitative/qualitative details. The assessee was once again asked to furnish exactly valuation of opening and closing stock of finished goods and raw materials separately. 3.1. The assessee furnished the details of valuation of closing stock of finished goods. The assessee was asked to furnish the details of sales of Fents & Rags. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtage. The penalty proceedings have been levied for this claim of excess shortage also. 3.3. In the penal proceedings, the assessee could not adduce anything more than what has been provided during the course of the assessment proceedings. The AO was not convinced and levied penalty of Rs. 12,19,948/-. 4. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) and pointed out that the quantum ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have heard the Ld. Departmental Representative at length and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. In so far as the addition on account of excess shortage is concerned, the Tribunal has deleted the said addition, therefore, to this extent, no penalty is leviable. However, on the addition on account of valuation of closing stock is concerne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
