Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Sri Chellayan Davidsamraj, C/o Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate Versus The Income Tax Officer

2016 (11) TMI 438 - ITAT CHENNAI

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - confirming the levy of penalty without due opportunity - Held that:- We are of the opinion that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) should give due opportunity to the assessee before confirming the penalty order. Hence, the issue i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t Member Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Durai Pandian, JCIT ORDER Per S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member This appeal of the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 12, Chennai, dated 13. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s involved in fabrication and erection of material handling systems for industries. The assessee is also involved in renting out cranes for industrial purposes. For assessment year 2008-09, he admitted certain turnover in cash system of accounting . .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aimed that he was following cash system of accounting and accounted only actual receipts. The Assessing Officer did not accept such claim and assessed the total receipts shown in the TDS certificates as turnover and initiated penalty proceeding under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iled an appeal before the erstwhile CIT(Appeals)-III, Chennai and consequent to the jurisdictional change, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) - 12, Chennai, confirmed the penalty order for non-pursuing of the appeal. 4. Aggrieved against the order of the CIT(Appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment year is contrary to law, facts, and in the circumstances of the case. (2) The CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act without assigning proper reasons and justification and ought to have appreciated that the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hout jurisdiction and not sustainable both on facts and in law. (4) The CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal in limini for the reasons stated from para 5 to para 5.5 of the impugned order without assigning proper reasons and justification and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version