9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-14, New Delhi, Dated 27.09.2018, for the A.Y. 2014-2015, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that A.O. made addition of Rs. 20,80,869/- on account of disallowance of exemption of long term capital gains incurred on selling of shares and Rs. 62,426/- on account of unexplained expe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te particulars of such income in terms of Explanation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5." 3.1. He has submitted that A.O. has not specified in which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty have been levied. Therefore, the issue is covered by the Judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows 73 taxmann.com 241, which is confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows (supra) have been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 73 taxmann.com 248 by dismissing the SLP of the Department. In the present case, the A.O. issued show cause notice dated 28.12.2016 which is also mentioned in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
