TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 1301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KC BUILDERS AND ANOTHER VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [ 2004 (1) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] delete the impugned penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act levied by the A.O. and sustained by the ld. CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1031/Chd/2019 - - - Dated:- 27-4-2021 - Shri. N.K. Saini, VP And Shri R.L. Negi, JM For the Assessee : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA. For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dly furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 2. From the aforesaid grounds, it is gathered that the only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to penalty imposed by the A.O. U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act) amounting to ₹ 17,00,000/- and sustained by the ld. CIT(A). 3. During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eferred to order dated 22/04/2021 in ITA No. 543/Chd/2019 (supra), therefore, the addition on the basis of which the impugned penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was levied by the A.O. and sustained by the ld. CIT(A), is not in existence, therefore, the impugned penalty levied by the A.O. and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be deleted. 6. On a similar issue, the Hon'ble Apex Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
