9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessees arise out of the orders dated 29-05-2017 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-1, Nashik confirming penalty imposed u/s. 271F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called 'the Act') in relation to the assessment year 2011-12. Since a common issue is raised in these appeals, we are, therefore, proceedings to dispose them off by this consolidated order. ARJUN DADA KHARATE: 2. Succinctly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld. CIT(A) seeking deletion of penalty, which did not find favour with the ld. first appellate authority, who affirmed the penalty. 3. We have heard the ld. DR through virtual court and gone through the relevant material on record. It is seen from the impugned order that the assessee stated reasons before the ld. CIT(A) for not furnishing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Such reasons have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the terms given in para 5 of the impugned order. This being the position, the case gets covered u/s. 273B of the Act. As such, we order to delete the penalty. BHIMA DADA KHARATE: 4. The facts in the case of Bhima Dada Kharate are mutatis mutandis similar to those discussed supra in the case of Sh. Arjun Dada Kharate. Following the view taken hereinabove, we order to delete the penalty. 5. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
