9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned CIT-A dated 16.7.2019, wherein following penalty levied under 271(1)(c) of the Act has been sustained:- Assessment year Amount of penalty 2008-09 10,43,087/- 2009-10 9,52,177/ 2. Brief facts of the case leading to the levy of penalty are that the assessing officer in these cases made disallowance of 3.89% y being the gross profit rate on account of his ad hoc estimate of 20% purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee submitted that they transfer money to their bank account located in Kanpur, Kolkata, etc. were made to finance the purchases of raw meat for onward transportation to Bombay and export thereafter. The assessee was asked to submit the purchase bills and other supporting documents such as address, pan, name of the parties from whom the purchases were made before the undersigned for verification. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r(3) 3. 89% of Col. 3 48,05,87,697 26,54,77,785 4,30,21,982 16,73,555 With the discussion in above para, the total addition made on account of bogus purchase is Rs. 16,73,555/- and the same is added back to the total income of the assessee. Penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated separately for concealment of income. [Addition: Rs. 16,73,555/-]." 3. Upon the aforesa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid 20% adhoc bogus purchase he has disallowed gross profit ratio of 3.89%. However the assessing officer did not doubt the sales. The learned CIT-A confirmed the addition. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was also levied. 7. As clear from the facts recorded above the disallowance has been made on an estimated basis on account of the non-production of suppliers before the assessing offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa (83 ITR 26), where in it was held that the authority may not levy the penalty if the conduct of the assessee is not found to be contumacious. 8. In the background of aforesaid discussion and precedent we set aside the order's of Ld. CITA and delete the levy of penalty. 9. In the result, both assessee's appeals are allowed. Pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
