TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (7) TMI 173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... we may notice facts arising in Tax Appeal No.342 of 2013. 2. Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 31.8.2012 raising following question for our consideration:- ''Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty for concealment of income by holding that in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sizable amount of Rs. 24.58 lakhs. It was not known whether party was assessed to tax at all or not. Simultaneously, he also ordered issuance of notice for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. In the penalty proceedings the Assessing Officer imposed a penalty of Rs.11.31 lakhs by his order dated 29.5.2006, which was 100% of the tax sought to be evaded. Such penalty was confirmed by CIT(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ujarat High Court rendered in the case of New Sorathia Engineering vs. CIT and CIT vs. Manu Engineering (supra) and also decision of the Honble Co-ordinate Benches rendered in the case of Ganapati Bhai M. Mistry Furnishers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 505/Ahd/2009 and in the case of Krishna Developers Vs. ITO in the ITA No.4447,4448 and 4449/Ahd/2007, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me/furnished inaccurate particulars of income. I, therefore, consider it a fit case for levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c)..... 7. The Tribunal was thus correct in holding that the Assessing Officer in the order of penalty also did not come to a clear finding regarding penalty being imposed on concealment of income or on furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 8. In view of the decisio....