9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, New Delhi, Dated 05.01.2017, for the ay 2007-2008, 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 assessee filed return of income declaring NIL income which was assessed at an income of Rs. 9,86,84,160/- under section 143(3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice for levy of the penalty. The A.O. ultimately levied the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on this addition. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 4. We have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the findings of the authorities below. The A.O. in the assessment order on the addition of Rs. 26,03,665/- on which penalty have been levied has mentioned "I am satisfied that asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings are, therefore, vitiated and no penalty is leviable. On this score itself similar view is taken by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows 73 taxmann.com 241. This decision is confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 73 taxmann.com 248. In this view of the matter, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and penalty is cancelled. 5. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
