TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant Smt. Renuka Jain Gupta for the Respondent ORDER U. B. S. Bedi, Judicial Member This appeal of the department is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-Meerut, dated 24.03.2009 relevant to assessment year 2005-06 whereby deletion of addition of penalty of ₹ 5,08,557/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 has been challenged. 2. The facts of the case indicate that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee surrendered an amount of ₹ 16,95,190/- under the head sundry creditors being difference in the sundry creditors' list submitted by the assessee and that received from sundry creditors. This amount was surrendered to avoid further litigati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 (All.) Cheap Cycle Stores v. CIT [2006] 281 ITR 166/154 taxman 284 (All.) CWT v. Someshwar Saran Kothiwal [2006] 285 ITR 185/[2007] 160 Taxman 132 (All.) CIT v. M.M. Gujamgadi [2007] 290 ITR 168/162 Taxman 211 (Kar.) Dilip N. Shroff v. Jt. CIT [2007] 291 ITR 519/161 Taxman 218 (SC) V.V. Projects Investments (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2008] 300 ITR 40/171 Taxman 62 (AP) Star International (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2009] 308 ITR (AT) 33 116 ITD 408/[2008] 23 SOT 88 (Luck) 4. Before CIT(A), it was further submitted that assessee gave a bona fide explanation and undeservedly gave all the documents and information without holding any information relating to the computation of assessee& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be imposed) no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) be levied. ( i ) CIT v. Suresh Chandra Mittal [2001] 251 I.T.R.9/119 Taxman 433 (SC) ( ii ) CIT v. Saran Khandsari Sugar Works ( supra ) ( iii ) CIT v. Mansa Ram Sons [1977] 106 I.T.R.307(All.) 6. Aggrieved by this order of CIT(A), department has come up in appeal and while relying upon the basis and reasoning given by the Assessing Officer, it was pleaded for setting aside the order of CIT(A) and restoring that of the Assessing Officer. It was further submitted that only on having scrutinized the assessment of the assessee, when assessee was unable to substantiate its claim of sundry creditors, he came forward to surrender the amount. So, it was not his voluntary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deleted by the AAC. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal by observing as under : 2. The AAC deleted the penalty for the following reasons : As held by the Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Mansa Ram Sons [1975] CTR (All) 163 : [1977] 106 ITR 307 (All) TC 50R.625, a conditional surrender of cash credits or agreement to certain assessment does not attract penalty proceedings. On the facts and in the circumstances of the present case, it appears to be obvious that the income assessed by the ITO was agreed to by the appellant as a measure of co-operation and with a view to escaping penal consequences, I find from the assessment order that no basis is given for estimating the income at ₹ 35 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
