TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1024X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has effected the corresponding sales, meaning thereby, the goods might have been purchased from unverified sources - AO instead of disallowing the entire purchases had restricted the disallowance to the profit element embedded in such purchases by estimating at 12.5%. The doubt, if any, is with regard to the source of purchases. Inability of the assessee to prove the source of purchase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 11-11-2019, of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-45, Mumbai deleting the penalty imposed under section 271(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2009-10. 2. Briefly the facts are, the assessee, a partnership firm, is stated to be engaged in the business of trading in agricultural chemicals. For the assessment years under appeal, assessee fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating at 12.5% in all the years. Assessee contested the aforesaid additions before learned Commissioner (Appeals). Following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2009-10, though, learned Commissioner (Appeals) approved estimation of profit element at 12.5%; however, he directed the assessing officer to reduce the gross profit already declared by the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals). Being convinced with the submissions of the assessee that no offence in terms of section 271(1)(c) of the Act has been committed, learned Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the penalty imposed in all the assessment years under challenge. 4. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. Undisputedly, based on certain information received from Sales-tax authorities, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs. However, that by itself, cannot lead to the conclusion that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income so as to visit him with penalty under section 271(c) of the Act. More so, when the additions have been made purely on estimate basis. Therefore, for the foretasted reasons, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of learned Commissioner (Appeals) in deleting the penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
