9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer ion levying penalty of Rs. 6,13,500/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, on addition of Rs. 23,09,710/- on account of capital gain and income from other sources being compulsory acquisition of land. 2. It is therefore, prayed that the above penalty levied by the assessing officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) may please be deleted. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal." 2. Facts as extracted from the orders of the lower authorities are that the land of aforesaid individual assessee was acquired by Special Land Acquisition Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined only on estimation basis. The penalty in lead case of Ambaben J Patel has also been deleted. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by him in this appeal are covered. The ld AR for the assessee further submits that in other penalty appeals under section 271(1)(c), all penalty has been deleted vide order dated 26.04.2022. 4. On the other hand, the learned DR for the revenue supported the order of assessing officer and ld CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities carefully in quantum assessment as well as in penalty matter. We find that against various additions made in the assessment, the assessee(s) filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in quantum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "capital gains" against the cost of pucca structure, the assessee's was allowed 60% as cost of acquisition or cost of improvement, against the relief of 50% as allowed by Ld. CIT(A). Further, in some cases, the agricultural income offered by assessee(s) were treated as "income from other sources" has been held as "income from agricultural activities". Thus, in quantum appeals all the assessee was granted substantial relief in deleting major part of additions and only part of capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
