TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der, the Assessing Officer has stated that non-filing of appeal goes to demonstrate the acceptance by the assessee of furnishing/concealing of income -. This observation goes to demonstrate that the AO had not specified the charge, whether it was far furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income. Therefore, looking into the facts where the Assessing Officer under the same set of facts has dropped the penalty in Assessment Year 2010-11, therefore, the penalty in this year also cannot be sustained, hence, deleted. Grounds raised in the appeal are allowed. - ITA No. 641/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 25-10-2021 - G.S. Pannu, President And Kul Bharat, Member (J) For the Appellant : P.S. Kashyap, CA For the Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessed income of ₹ 32,88,91,470/- by the ACIT Central Circle-I, Faridabad. It is noted by the Assessing Officer ( AO ) that the issue related to deduction 80IC of the Act was set-aside back to the file of the Assessing Officer. It is further observed by Assessing Officer that, in respect of addition of ₹ 15,96,494/- made during the course of assessment on account of unaccounted receipt/expenditure as noted in Saraswati note pad which was found and seized from the premises of the assessee company, the assessee did not file any appeal. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings on this addition and subsequently by the impugned order dated 29.09.2015 imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act of ₹ 5,42,648/-. 3. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Sr. DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival submission, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The Revenue has not controverted the fact that the facts are identical as were in the Assessment Year 2010-11 and the penalty proceeding pertaining of this year was dropped. The assessee has placed on record the order of the Assessing Officer pertaining to the Assessment Year 2010-11 dated 29.09.2015, wherein, the Assessing Officer had himself dropped the penalty proceedings. However, in the Assessment Year under appeal, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty by observing as under:- The submission of the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
