9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 499X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il Kureshi ) 1. Leave to place correct annexures on record. 2. Revenue is in appeal against the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 9.6.2015 raising the following questions for our consideration : "(A) Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of Rs. 77,25,000/levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act? (B) Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vant accounting period. And the assessee's returns has come on 1392011. The same stands accepted in the assessment framed therein. In these facts we quote latest decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Kirit Dayabhai Patel v ACIT case Tax appeal no.1181 of 2010 with 1182 of 2010 to 1185 of 2010 decided on 3122014 holding that if no addition is made in furtherance to the post searc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... them being at the residential premises of Shri Paresh Gajera during which it appears that some incriminating materials regarding the business activity of the assessee was found. 5. For the assessment year 20112012, the assessee had filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 2.74 crores. The Assessing Officer while accepting such income without any additions, decided to initiate penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
