9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 271(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that quantum additions/disallowance were deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT vide order in ITA.No. 447/Mum/2018 dated 16.05.2018 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 3. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that, in this case the Hon'ble Bench had deleted the additions/disallowances made in the Assessment Order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act which was the basis for levying the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the Tribunal deleted the additions/disallowance in the quantum proceedings the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act will not survive and therefore the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly deleted the penalty. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AO the ledger confirmations of purchases from parties who supplied more than Rs. 10,00,000/- during the year under consideration. The AO has received it on 19.02.2015. Those confirmations are at page 8-17 of the P/B. The ledger account with purchase bills of all unregistered vendors are at page 18-118 of the P/B. The proof of payment through bank statements are at page 119 to 139 of the P/B. The quantitative tally is at page 140-147 of the P/B. In the instant case, the AO has issued notice u/s 133(6) to four parties which were returned by the postal authorities as 'unserved'. Then he mentions that the appellant has made purchases of Rs. 2,26,40,410/- from unrecognized parties. The estimation of profit by the AO @ 12.5% on the above amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evied, are deleted, there remains no basis at all for levying the penalty for concealment and, therefore, in such a case no such penalty can survive and the same is liable to be cancelled as in the instant case. Ordinarily, penalty cannot stand if the assessment itself is set aside. Where an order of assessment or reassessment on the basis of which penalty has been levied on the assessee has itself been finally set aside or cancelled by the Tribunal or otherwise, the penalty cannot stand by itself and the same is liable to be cancelled......." 5.1 Similar decisions have been given in CIT vs. Continental Air Express (P) Ltd [2009] 176 Taxman 41 (Delhi); CIT vs. Babul Harivadan Parikh [2014] 222 Taxman 159 (Gujarat); Amrut Tubewell Co. vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
