TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and has not disclosed in the return of income and not paid the tax thereon. But only on asking by the AO about the expenses on account of excise duty amounting to ₹ 2,01,284/-, the assessee accepted his fault thereon and did not file appeal against this addition also. Even otherwise the amount in the nature of penalty for violation of excise law which the assessee has paid is not a business expenses. These facts also not disclosed in the return of income and were detected during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, that it was also a case of non disclosure of material facts which attracts Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act. No interference is called for in the well reasoned order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penditure can never be said to have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the business purpose of the assessee. This fact was also not disclosed in the return of income and was detected during assessment proceedings. Therefore, it was also case of non disclosure of material facts which attracts Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act as well . 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the various grounds raised by the appellant before him and more so that the satisfaction has not been recorded in a proper manner by the Ld. ACIT and no show cause notice given below addition. 6. That the appellant craves leave to alter, amend, delete or add all or any ground before or at the time of hearing. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lity. Before the Ld. First Appellate Authority the assessee in its written note filed, has not made any submission to establish the nature of claim, but from the perusal of assessment order and assessee s submission, it was apparent that the amount was in the nature of penalty for violation of excise laws. Such expenditure can never be said to have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the business purpose of the assessee. The Revenue Authority also held that this fact was also not disclosed in the return of income and was detected during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, it was also the case of non-disclosure of material facts which attracts Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Ld. First Appellate Authority has dismis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gaged in manufacturing of electrical insulated cables and conduits pipes, deriving its income from business and profession. Assessee filed its return of income of ₹ 24,07,648/- on 14.11.2014 along with necessary details and particulars. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS. After issuing a prescribed notice to the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act on 15.12.2016 and made the addition in dispute i.e. penalty expenses of ₹ 2,01,281/- which was debited in the Profit Loss Account on account of penalty on additional excise duty. Assessee firm was paid penalty of ₹ 2,01,284/- on additional excise duty which is disputable assessee voluntary offered the same fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lty which was detected by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings and assessee has accepted and paid the tax thereon and did not file any appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority against the addition in dispute on which the penalty has been imposed. I am of the view that assessee has concealed its income and has not disclosed in the return of income and not paid the tax thereon. But only on asking by the AO about the expenses on account of excise duty amounting to ₹ 2,01,284/-, the assessee accepted his fault thereon and did not file appeal against this addition also. Even otherwise the amount in the nature of penalty for violation of excise law which the assessee has paid is not a business expenses. These facts also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
