9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 821X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed u/s. 263 or 264, by giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and within six months from the receipt of the said appellate or revision order. Thus in our considered view, in the event of the order passed by the Tribunal is modified by Hon ble High Court of Gujarat, the AO is required to give effect to the judgment passed by the Hon ble High Court by invoking provisions of Section 275(1A) of the Act and revise the penalty order accordingly. Thus we do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) who has duly followed Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal and deleted proportionate penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. Further the Revenue could not place on record, whether any order staying the operatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A) u/s. 271AAB of the Act. 3. On further appeal by the assessee against quantum addition before ITAT, the Hon ble ITAT in ITA No. 25/Ahd/2021 dated 08- 08-2023 had confirmed the addition to Rs. 30,68,140/- as against the total addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.28.37 crores. The summary of additions/disallowances confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) and the Hon ble ITAT are as follows: Sr. No Particulars Amount as per assessment order Amount confirmed/upheld by CIT(A) Amount confirmed/upheld by ITAT 1. Addition on account of on money as unaccounted income 6,74,24,296 The Ld. CIT(A) has restricted the addition at Rs.36,30,000/- The Ld. ITAT has restricted the addition @ 20% i.e. Rs.7,26,000/- vide para 9.5 of ITAT order. 2. Addition on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Asst. Year 2018-19 wherein the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.23,87,99,020/- which was reduced to Rs.1,51,27,899/- by the Ld. CIT(A) and the ITAT confirming the additions to Rs.4,83,533/-. Though the Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s. 271AAB on the addition confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) of Rs.1,51,27,894/- at 60% namely Rs. 90,76,736/-. The Ld. CIT(A) restricted the penalty to Rs.2,90,120/- being the addition of Rs. 4,83,533/- confirmed by the ITAT for the Asst. Year 2018-19. 6. Aggrieved against the above common appellate orders, the Revenue is in appeal before us raising the solitary Ground (except change in figures) for both the Asst. Years 2017-18 2018-19: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings for the imposition of penalty is passed before the order of 33 [the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court or the Supreme Court is received by the 34 [***] Principal Commissioner or Commissioner or the order of revision under section 263 or section 264 is passed, an order imposing or enhancing or reducing or cancelling penalty or dropping the proceedings for the imposition of penalty may be passed on the basis of assessment as revised by giving effect to such order of 33 [the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals) or, the Appellate Tribunal or the High Court, or the Supreme Court or order of revision under section 263 or section 264: Provided that no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
