9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome on the part of the assessee-company. However, for the impugned A.Y. 2015- 16, when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), CIT(A) simply confirmed the penalty levied by the A.O. under section 271(1)(c) without going into the merits of the case. It is a fact that in the assessment order the A.O. has accepted the profit arises out of Percentage Completion Method followed by the assessee at 27.2% and accepted the estimated profit on the said percentage at Rs.35 lakhs and made the impugned addition, on which, penalty proceedings were initiated by the A.O. Sr. D.R. did not controvert the submissions of the assessee that under identical facts and circumstances, the A.O. himself has dropped penalty proceedings u/s 271 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed return of income on 30.10.2017 declaring total income at Rs.1,63,430/-. In this case, the A.O. completed the original assessment under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by determining the total income of the assessee company at Rs.30,08,070/- vide order dated 28.12.2017 and initiated the penalty proceedings separately vide penalty order dated 29.06.2018 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by levying the penalty of Rs.8,78,990/- after obtaining necessary approval from the Ld. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Noida under section 274(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide order dated 29.06.2018. 2.1. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 28.10.2021 confirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2017 passed under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and submitted that for the impugned A.Y. 2015-16 the assessee completed construction work of 27.2% and estimated the profit thereon up to 31.03.2014 by following Percentage Completion Method at Rs.85,00,000/-, out of which, the assessee has already paid an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- as estimated profit during F.Y.-2012-13. Accordingly balance profit of Rs.35,00,000/- is being taxed for F.Y. 2013-14 relevant to A.Y. 2014-15. He submitted that the A.O. has accepted the estimated profit in the preceding assessment years where no penalty proceedings have been initiated against the assessee as the assessee has neither furnished inaccurate particulars of income nor concealed the particulars of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany. However, for the impugned A.Y. 2015- 16, when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) simply confirmed the penalty levied by the A.O. under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 at Rs.8,78,990/-, without going into the merits of the case. It is a fact that in the assessment order the A.O. has accepted the profit arises out of Percentage Completion Method followed by the assessee at 27.2% and accepted the estimated profit on the said percentage at Rs.35 lakhs and made the impugned addition, on which, penalty proceedings were initiated by the A.O. vide order dated 29.06.2018. In view of the above, first of all, I note that the Ld. Sr. D.R. did not controvert the submissions of the assessee that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
