9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rn arose from the order passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- "On facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC Appeal Centre has erred in upholding levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act amounting to Rs. 17,81,066/-. The penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act may please be cancelled. The appellant reserves its right to add to, alter, amend, modify or delete any of the grounds taken in this appeal." 3. The only grievance of the assessee is against the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company and is engaged in the busines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 11,31,83,522 claim by it. Accordingly, after making the aforesaid additions, the AO assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 31,28,61,332. 5. Meanwhile, the penalty proceedings vide notice dated 20/03/2015 issued under section 274 r/w section 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated. The Assessing Officer ("AO") vide penalty order dated 30/09/2015, passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, levied a penalty of Rs. 17,81,066, on the basis of additions on account of donation and charity, and on account of loss on sale of assets, which were debited to the profit and loss account, however, the same were not been added by the assessee in the computation of income. Vide penalty order it was held that the aforesaid aspects came to the lig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid the differential tax amount. As regards the loss on sale of assets of Rs. 2,26,832, which was debited to the profit and loss account but not added to the computation of income, the assessee accepted the error and did not object to the discrepancy pointed out by the AO during the assessment proceedings. 8. From the above, it is evident that it is not a case wherein the assessee has disputed the discrepancies pointed out by the AO during the scrutiny proceedings. Further, we find that once the aforesaid discrepancies were pointed out the assessee accepted its mistake and filed the revised computation of income, and paid the tax difference of Rs. 22,59,394. It is undisputed that the assessee has not further challenged the aforesaid additi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
