9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") challenging the order dated 04th June, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short "Tribunal") in ITA No. 1591/Del/2009 for the Assessment Year 2001-2002. 2. It is pertinent to mention that in the present case the Tribunal has deleted the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer (in short, "AO") under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. So far ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the explanation offered by the respondent-assessee was bonafide and genuine. 3. Mr. N.P. Sahni, learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the Tribunal had erred in law in deleting the penalty imposed by the AO under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mr. Sahni also submitted that the Tribunal had erred in accepting the explanation offered by the respondent-assessee as bonafide. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... off its debts in the books of account. We are also in agreement with the Tribunal that the explanation furnished by the respondent-assessee in the present case is bonafide and as the said finding had not been controverted by the DR before the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal could not have reached any other conclusion. Consequently, the present appeal being devoid of merit i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
