9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 613X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion stands deleted by the ld.CIT(A). We find that sub-clause (iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable him, which shall not be less than but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income As quantification of the penalty is depended upon the addition made to the income of the assessee. Since in the present case, basis for visiting the assessee with penalty has been extinguished by deleting addition by the ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 24.7.2018, and the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ested as per the meaning of section 2(18) of the Income Tax Act. Since this amount represented loans and advances received by the assessee from the said company, the ld.AO made an addition of ₹ 79,29,156/- on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. This addition was challenged before the ld.first appellate authority without success. Assessee went in appeal before the ITAT in ITA No.1301/Ahd/2010, and the Tribunal vide order dated 8.5.2013 has set aside order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to his file for fresh consideration. In the set aside proceedings before the ld.CIT(A), the issue was decided in favour of the assessee, and the addition was deleted. 3. Dissatisfied with the action of the ld.CIT(A) in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . On due consideration of the above facts, it emerges out from the record that quantum addition of ₹ 79,29,156/- added by the AO with aid of section 2(22)(e) of the Act on account of deemed dividend was deleted by the ld.CIT(A) in the second round of litigation. Against this order of the ld.CIT(A), the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed by the ITAT on the ground that tax effect involved in this appeal was less than ₹ 50 lakhs. Thus the addition for which the assessee is being visited with penalty stands deleted by the ld.CIT(A) and confirmed by the ITAT on the ground that appeal is not maintainable. But one fact is clear that the addition stands deleted by the ld.CIT(A). 6. On due consideration of the above facts and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
