9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Raviraj Y.V. - Ld.DR ORDER George Mathan, Judicial Member 1. These are two appeals filed by the revenue against the order of the learned CIT (A) - 2, Panaji in appeal no ITA.No.205/CIT(A)-2/PNJ/2015-16 dated 10.08.2016 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 and ITA.No.206/CIT(A)-2/PNJ/2015-16 dated 10.08.2016 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Shri Raviraj Y.V. represented on behalf of the revenue a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its return. The assessments came to be completed accepting the amount declared in the return. It was submission that penalty under section 271AAB came to be passed imposing penality on the assessee firm. It was submission that on appeal the learned CIT(A) deleted the levy of penalty holding that the search was not at the premises of the assessee firm but on the residential premises of the partner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h. Search admittedly is on the residence of one of the partner of the assessee firm. Further a perusal of the order of the learned CIT(A) also clearly shows that the learned CIT(A) has cancelled the penalty on the ground that there was no search in the case of the assessee firm. The revenue has not been able to point out as to how this finding of the learned CIT(A) is erroneous. This being so the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
