TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he cost price of cement bags vide last purchase bill dated 28.3.2009. Apart from this estimate made by the AO, there is nothing to show that the way in which the assessee valued its closing stock was incorrect. This divulges that the addition has been made only on the basis of estimate made by the AO. It is a settled legal position that when income is estimated, then, there can be no question of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BER For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Amrit Lal, JCIT ORDER This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT (A) on 29.11.2013 upholding the penalty of ₹ 45,100/- imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called the Act ) in relation to the assessment year 2009-10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... despite notice. As such, I am proceeding to dispose of this appeal ex parte qua the assessee. It is noted that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) has been imposed on the basis of difference in the value of stock shown by the assessee and as estimated by the AO by applying the rate of last purchase bill dated 28.3.2009. But, for that, there is nothing to show that the assessee, in fact, concealed his incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in quantum proceedings, the penalty can still be deleted by the Tribunal, if the facts justify. 5. It is noticed that the only basis of addition is the estimate of valuation made by the AO in valuing the closing stock @ ₹ 200.50 per bag, being the cost price of cement bags vide last purchase bill dated 28.3.2009. Apart from this estimate made by the AO, there is nothing to show tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
