9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent case, this amount was at ₹ 25,051/-. As the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act leviable without taking the approval from the Joint/Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was not justified, accordingly the same is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1146/Chd/2019 - - - Dated:- 15-10-2020 - N. K. Saini, Vice President And Sanjay Garg, Member (J) For the Appellant : Nalin K. Nohria and B.K. Nohria, C.As. For the Respondents : Rishi Kumar, ACIT ORDER N.K. Saini, Vice President This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dt. 28/05/2019 of Ld. CIT(A)-2, Chandigarh. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: 1. That the Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That the appellant reserves the right to add, amend or delete one or more of the grounds of appeal before the appeal is disposed off. 3. Ground No. 2 was not pressed, therefore, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 4. The grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the sustenance of penalty of ₹ 17,242/- levied by the A.O. under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). 5. Facts of the case as appearing in the penalty order dt. 30/03/2018 in brief are that the assessment in this case was completed vide order dt. 31/03/2014 at an income of ₹ 25,71,060/- against the returned income of ₹ 20,33,820/- by making the following addition: 1. Addition of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e explanation of the assessee with respect to the disallowance of Foreign Travelling Expenses and therefore the penalty under section 271(1)(c) on account of the said addition was dropped. However the A.O. did not find merit in the reply of the assessee on the another addition of ₹ 81,072/- relating to the addition under the head income from other sources . The A.O. held that the assessee furnished the inaccurate particulars of income resulting in the concealment of income. Accordingly, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to ₹ 17,242/- was levied. 6. Being aggrieved the assessee, carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) who sustained the penalty levied by the A.O. 7. Now the assessee is in appeal. 8. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the aforesaid notice which is placed at page no. 14 of the assessee's paper book. It was submitted that the A.O. was not sure as to whether there was a concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, therefore the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was not justified. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff Vs. JCIT reported at 291 ITR 591 and the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunath Cotton Ginning Factory Others reported at 359 ITR 565. 10. In his rival submissions the Ld. Sr. DR strongly supported the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and further submitted that since the penalty levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax before levying the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the reply given vide letter dt. 30/05/2019 (copy of which is placed at page no. 16 17 of the assessee's paper book) was as under: F. No.: DCIT/Circle 6(1)/Mohali/2019-20/178 Dated: 30.05.2019 To Sh. Ramesh Dudani C-104, I.A., Phase-7, Mohali. Sir, Sub: Calculation in respect of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) for the A.Y. 2011-12-Regarding- Kindly refer to the order u/s. 19(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 passed vide no. dated 17/05/2019 in your case. 2. In connection with the above, Further, point wise information in respect of your office letter no. 934 dated 21.05.2019 is as under:- i. Please provide the information a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT Mohali Range has been obtained before levy of penalty. Since penalty levied was at ₹ 17,242/-, approval from JCIT/Addl CIT was not sought as per Sec 274 of the Act. iv. If no. (iii) information is yes please provide a copy of the approval as requested in para (iii). Not Applicable This is for your information and further necessary action at your end. Yours Sincerely, Sd/- (Lalit Bishnoi) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1), Mohali 12. From the aforesaid reply dated 30.05.2019 under RTI Act by the Department, it is clear that the minimum penalty leviable on the addition of ₹ 81,072/- was ₹ 25,051/- therefore the approval from Joint/Additional Commissioner of Income Tax wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
