9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity to the appellant. Hence, the order is bad in law and illegal. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) had wrongly, illegally and without justification not considered the replies filed before him quantum addition was voluntarily offered by appellant during the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) on the ground that no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) be initiated. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in stating in the order that "the assessee in his written note filed has not made any submission to establish the nature of claim, but from a perusal of the assessment order and assessee's submission, it is appellant that the amount is in the nature of penalty for violation of excise laws. Such expenditure can never be said to have been incurred wholly and exclu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty proceedings and assessment proceedings assessee has relied upon various decisions including the decision of Reliance Petroproduct Pvt. Ltd. of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 322 ITR 158. The AO was of the view that decision was with respect to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and was relating to the claim no expenditure against exempt income. There was no non-disclosure of any material fact in that case. The AO also held that in the case of Dharamendra Textile Processors reported in 306 ITR 277 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that mens-rea is not an essential ingredient for imposition of penalty, as it is a civil liability. Before the Ld. First Appellate Authority the assessee in its written note filed, has not made any submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on account of excise duty which was not disclosed by the assessee in its return of income and was detected by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings and assessee paid the taxes thereon assessee accepted its part and paid the tax. Therefore, Ld. DR requested that the penalty in dispute has rightly been levied by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee may be dismissed. 5. After hearing Ld. DR and perusing the orders passed by the Revenue Authority, I am of the view that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing of electrical insulated cables and conduits pipes, deriving its income from business and profession. Assessee filed its return of income o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29.06.2017 and the Ld. First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the penalty in dispute and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Before the undersigned assessee did not appear as discussed above in spite of two times RPAD to the assessee. 6. I have heard the Ld. DR perused the relevant record available with me especially order passed by the Revenue Authority. I am of the considered view that during the course of assessment proceedings the AO asked the assessee about the expenses on account of excise duty of Rs. 2,01,285/- made being penalty 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 Authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
