9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seeks to Section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs. 5,17,522/-, imposed by the Assessing Officer in his order dt. 27-06-2018 affirmed in the CIT(A)'s lower appellate discussion reading as follows: "4. The only issue involved in this case is levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Assessing Officer in the order has stated as under: "In the profit and loss account uploaded along with the audit report, assessee has shown gross receipts of Rs. 7,49,67,500/-. Assessee vide letter dated 30.11.2017 submitted that gross receipts were inclusive of service tax whereas in the return of income net turnover is reflected. On verification of audit report and profit and loss account, it is noticed that, assessee has reduced Rs. 36,83,371/- as service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase is covered by the provisions of section 44AB of the IT Act. The books of account have been audited and it is not clear how payments to the extent of Rs. 16,31,515/- have not been reflected either in the books of account or in bank account statements. If at all the claims of salary payments is genuine, such assessee's explanation ought to be substantiated. I am of the considered opinion that the assessee's explanation is not bonafide. In this regard, the provisions of section 271(1)(c) are attracted." 4.1 During the appellate proceedings, the assessee vide her letter dated 01.05.2019 has made following written submissions: "Smt. Sushma Bobbiti (the assessee) is engaged in the business of Man Power Recruitment Services. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by June 18, 2018, without providing any further opportunity, the AO has levied penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the extent of Rs. 5,17,522/- i.e., 100% of tax against the addition of Rs. 20,51,856/-. Aggrieved by the above penalty order, the assessee is in appeal before Appellate Commissioner 7, Hyderabad. The above under statement of income was purely on account of clerical error in Profit & Loss A/c and but not on account of any willful income escapement. Further, the books of accounts of the assessee is also audited u/s. 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the tax auditor was also overlooked the above clerical error. The above clerical error was identified only during the assessment proceedings and the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sis of the certificate of auditor in Form No. 3CD. The claim made by the AR of the appellant that the mistake occurred was due to oversight is not acceptable. The appellant did not furnish any revised return rectifying its mistake, before the case was taken for scrutiny. It is pertinent to mention here that during the course of penalty proceedings, the appellant sought to explain the difference as salary payments. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer vide show-cause letter dated 8-6-2017 required the appellant to furnish details of the salaries paid furnished the salary / wage register, reconciliation of the amounts paid etc. The appellant failed to furnish the same. Hence, the claim of the appellant that inflated service tax payments reflecte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
