2023 (11) TMI 1356

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 28/07/2023 in confirming the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. The assessee has raised sole ground of appeal which reads .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... settled position under law that no penalty is leviable on estimated additions. To support his view, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the following case laws: (i) CIT Vs Subhash Trading Co. (1996) 86 Taxman 30 (Guj) (ii) Navjivan Oil Mills Vs CIT (2002) 124 Taxman 392 (Guj) (iii) CIT Vs Valimkbhai H patel (2006) 280 ITR 487 (Guj) (iv) ITO Vs Bombaywala Readymade Stores (2015) 55 taxmann .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assing the assessment order, noted that the has shown purchases in cash aggregating to Rs. 77,03,224/-. The Assessing Officer after giving show cause notice, disallowed 50% of such purchases. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to the extent of 5%, however, 5% was applied on total turnover. On r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X