9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1721X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TMI 1759 - ITAT DELHI] Assessing Officer was not sure under which provisions of Section 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee is liable for penalty. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of M/s SSA Emerald Meadows [ 2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SC ORDER] - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of ₹ 6,27,823/-. 4. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee had already disclosed an income of ₹ 20,00,000/- u/s 132(4) of the Act. Therefore, the addition made by the AO was only of ₹ 3,51,790/- but he had levied the penalty on the income of ₹ 23,51,790/-. It was further stated that while initiating the penalty p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... placed on the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi in ITA No. 4325/Del/2016 for the assessment year 2010-11 in the case of Aman Mehtani Vs DCIT, Central Circle-I, Faridabad, order dated 22.11.2017 (copy of the same was furnished which is placed on record). 6. In his rival submissions, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the notice dated 28.12.2011 produced by the Ld. AR during the hearing, it can be seen that the Assessing Officer was not sure under which provisions of Section 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee is liable for penalty. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of M/s SSA' Emerald Meadows. The extract of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. " 8. Since, the facts of the present case are similar to the aforesaid referred to case. So, respectfully following the aforesaid referred to order dated 22.11.2017, the impugned penalty levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
