TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For The Assessee : Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, CA For The Department : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR ORDER PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.11.2017 of CIT(A)- 42, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2001-02. Levy of penalty of ₹ 5,14,150/- by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which has been sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is the only issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal. 3. The ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset referring to page 1 of the Paper Book drew the attention of the Bench to the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 and submitted that the Assessing Officer has not struck off the inappropriate wor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e considered rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. I find the Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹ 5,14,150/- u/s 271(1)(c) on account of accommodation entries of ₹ 13,00,000/- taken by the assessee from M/s Ankur Marketing Limited which during the course of assessment proceedings was found not in existence and the assessee was unable to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the loan creditor and genuineness of the transactions. I find the addition was sustained by the ld. CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer thereafter initiated penalty proceedings and, thereafter, levied penalty of ₹ 5,14,150/- u/s 271(1)(c) which has been sustained by the ld. CIT(A). It is the submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2013) 359 ITR 565. 4. In our view, since the matter is covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7. I find the SLP filed by the Revenue has been dismissed by the Hon ble Apex Court. Further, the various Benches of the Tribunal following the above decisions are cancelling the penalty so levied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of non-striking of the inappropriate words from the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act. Since in the instant case, the Assessing Officer has not struck off the inappropriate words in the notices issued u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
