9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrect in imposing the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the act. The mistake on the part of the assessee was a bona-fide mistake, which ultimately had no impact on the taxable income of the assessee. Therefore, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is cancelled. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate And Shri Parin Shah, A.R. For the Respondent : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short the CIT(A) ) dated 12.01.2024 for the Assessment Year 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax sought to be evaded for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3. Aggrieved with the penalty order of the AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, which was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order. Penalty as imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 4. Now, the assessee is in second appeal before us. 5. Following grounds of appeal have been taken in this appeal: 1. The order passed by NFAC is bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming penalty of Rs. 78,31,400/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act under the limb furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income ignoring fact t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing construction amount towards application of income. The Ld. Senior Counsel further submitted that there was no variation in the total income as shown by the assessee and as computed by the AO in the assessment order. Therefore, the machinery provision for computation of tax sought to be evaded was not applicable in this case. The Ld. Senior Counsel also relied upon the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Oshwal Education Trust, [2014] 52 taxmann.com 332 (Gujarat) for his submission that no penalty can be levied due to bona-fide mistake of the assessee, which has no effect on the income of the assessee. 7. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have carefully con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
