TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1031X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment year 2001-2002 is directed against the order of the Ld CIT(A)-IV, Baroda dated 29.10.2009. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the appeal: 1. Because the CIT(A) erred in confirming p4enalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of ₹ 4,23,687/- for difference in the stock between the stock statement given to the bank with only intention to continually enjoy the overdraft facility ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ea or willful concealment. 3. The briefly stated facts in this case is that the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was finalised at income of ₹ 5,81,530/- against the returned loss of ₹ 4,47,270/-. The AO made addition of ₹ 17,45,851/- on account of difference of the closing stock as on 31- 3-2001 between the stock statement furnished by the assessee to the Charotar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isions of Calcutta High Court in the case of Bharat Minerals Sales Corporation, 253 ITR 419 and Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Pioneer Breeding Farm, 295 ITR 78 to the proposition that non-acceptance of the explanation of the assessee is not adequate ground for levy of penalty. On the contrary, the learned DR has strongly supported the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and submitted that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee in furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of the income. These facts of the case of the assessee cannot be simply brushed aside for the reason that it is the common practice in the business circle to show one type of stock statement to the bank for availing financial facilities, the value of which is based on the market price and other set of stock statement for the pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
