9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 970X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is not sustainable in the eyes of law -Even the learned Departmental Authorities has not brought any cogent material to prove otherwise warranting interference at the instance of the Revenue. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered view that Commissioner (Appeals) was indeed justified in directing the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty, as there was no concealment of income on the part of the assessee have been proved by the Revenue and additions made on estimation by the Assessing Officer do not call for initiation of penalty. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 6576/Mum./2019 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2021 - S. Rifaur Rahman, Member (A) And Pavan Kumar Gadale, Member (J) For the Appellant : Gurbinder Singh ORDE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed to ₹ 12,37,173. The Revenue being aggrieved by this order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), filed appeal before the Tribunal, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench upholding the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the Revenue's appeal. 3. Now, during the penalty proceedings, the Assessing Officer called sought explanation from the assessee as to why penalty should not be imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for filing inaccurate particulars of income. In response, the assessee filed submissions vide her letter dated 31st May 2018, and also in support of her submissions relied upon various case laws. The Assessing Officer carefully perused the submissions and case laws relied upon by the assessee and fou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding in para 62 that finding in assessment proceedings cannot automatically adopted in penalty proceedings and the authorities have to consider the matter afresh from different angle. Moreover, in the case of Ajay Loknath Lohia, order dated 5.10.2018, Mumbai ITAT has addressed that when AO had estimated cost GP on alleged purchases, such disallowance does not tantamount to willful furnishing. 7. In the case of ETCO Profiles Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, in ITA No. 5351/Mum/2012, Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT had held that: the AO has disallowed 20% of purchases only on presumptions without establishing fully that the assessee has made purchases from grey market. Even, if it is assumed for a moment that the assessee might have purchased goods fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of purchases as bogus automatically cannot justify the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, the penalty of ₹ 2,19,719/-, imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, by the AO, is hereby deleted and the grounds of appeal, raised as above, are allowed. DECISION on Ground No. 1 is directed against the issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law: 10. The notice was issued on the addition made on account of accommodation entries shown in assessee's books of accounts. During the appellate proceedings, the AR of the appellant has not furnished any written submission with regard to this ground of appeal. Moreover, the penalty imposed by the AO on alleged bogus purchases is deleted as given in the aforementioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iv) CIT v/s. PHI Seeds India Ltd., [2008] 301 ITR 0013 (Del); and v) Dilip N. Shroff v/s. JCIT [2007] 291 ITR 519 (SC). 7. Even the learned Departmental Authorities has not brought any cogent material to prove otherwise warranting interference at the instance of the Revenue. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered view that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was indeed justified in directing the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty, as there was no concealment of income on the part of the assessee have been proved by the Revenue and additions made on estimation by the Assessing Officer do not call for initiation of penalty. Consequently, we uphold the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) by dismissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
