Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 652 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - LTCG determination - CIT(A) has quashed the penalty order in view of the fact that the A.O. did not specify the limb under which penalty proceedings are initiated - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) has adopted stamp duty valuation fixed by the stamp authority for the year relevant to the assessment year 2008-09 to determine the Fair Market Value of the property transferred by the assessee. There should not be any dispute that the details relating to guideline value fixed by the stamp authorities are available in the public domain and the Ld CIT(A) has adopted the Fair market value pertaining to the year under consideration, while the AO had adopted the value pertaining to AY 2010-11. Hence, we do not find merit in the contentions of revenue. A.O. did not specify the limb under which penalty proceedings are initiated and also did not strike off the inapplicable portion in the penalty notice. CIT(A) followed the decision rendered by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]. No reason to interfere with the orders passed by ld. CIT(A) in quashing the penalty order.
|