9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 945X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO was not sure about the default of the assessee whether it was concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.s Necessity of recording satisfaction - Satisfaction recorded by the AO in the assessment order, it does not support the case of the revenue as the AO has stated that the penalty proceedings are initiated for inaccurate particulars whereas in the case in hand when the income was not at all declared in the return of income, then it is a case of concealment of particulars of income and not furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. AO Statement that the assessee has consciously made the concealment by furnishing inaccura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or filing the appeal delayed and requested condonation of delay on the ground of sickness of the assessee and also on technical problem at portal. The application of the ld. A/R is supported by an Affidavit of the assessee and also medical prescription of the Doctor. 2. Having considered the rival submissions as well as going through the contents of the application and affidavit of the assessee along with medical prescription, I am satisfied that the assessee has explained a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. Accordingly, I condone the delay of 1 (one) day in filing the present appeal. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 relates to confirming the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO Ward 4(3) Kolkata in ITA No. 260/Kol/2022 dated 09.11.2022 wherein the Tribunal followed the judgment of Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Brijendra Kumar Poddar, IA No. GA/2/2018 dated 23.11.2021. 4. On the other hand, the ld. D/R supported the orders of the revenue authorities. 5. We have heard rival submissions, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Penalty of Rs. 1,40,524/- was levied on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Necessary satisfaction was made by the AO in the assessment order. However, for the purpose of initiating proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act notice under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n view of the Explanation-1 below the section 271(1)(c). I am satisfied that, it is a fit case for levy of penalty. The minimum & maximum leviable penalty is computed as under :- 1. Total tax determined on total income of Rs. 6,64,310/- (Rs. 2,14,310/- R/I + Rs. 4,50,000/- addition confirmed by CIT (A) Rs. 1,40,524/- 2. Tax on return income of Rs. 2,14,310/- Nil 3. Tax on concealed income (1-2) Rs. 1,40,524/- 4. Minimum leviable penalty (100%) Rs. 1,40,524/- 5. Maximum leviable penalty (300%) Rs. 4,21,572/- Thus the AO has again stated that the assessee has consciously made the concealment by furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. The statement of the AO is very vague and mixing up both the default of conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
