Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 1715 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - revenue contended that instead of cancelling the penalty, the ld. CIT(A) should have confirmed the penalty as the assessee made wrong claim of carry forward loss from HUF owned family business - Held that:- It is pertinent to note that in the impugned order the ld. CIT(A) didn't cancelled the penalty but directed the Assessing Officer to first give appeal effect to the order dated 13.07.2011 of ld. CIT(A) and thereafter if any addition/disallowance sought to be sustained then only the Assessing Officer should levy a penalty by passing a fresh order on that particular amount of addition/disallowance so sustained, if considered necessary. In our considered opinion, this direction of ld. CIT(A) is factually and legally correct; therefore, we decline to interfere. - Decide against revenue
|