2023 (4) TMI 802

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ear 2015-16 vide which the ld.CIT(A) confirmed action of the AO in imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The grounds raised are as under: i) The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming action of AO in initiating and levying penalty under section 271(l)(c) of the Act without recording mandatory satisfaction as contemplated under the Act at the time of framing the assessment for the year under consideration. ii) The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the penalty of Rs.38,44,406/- levied u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act. iii) In any case, the impugned penalty order is barred by limitation and thus without jurisdiction and illegal. iv) In any case, quantification .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... quantum appeal of the assessee dated 13.10.2021 (supra). We find that in the quantum appeal the assessee has raised the following grounds challenging the addition, based on which the Revenue authorities have imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. "1. The Ld. A. O. has erred in law and on facts computing income of Rs.24,40,300/-even though the appellant has provided all necessary explanations and details during the assessment proceedings. 2. The Id. AO has erred in law in expanding the limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny by going beyond the issue of verification by mismatch and expanding the scope of changing the head of income without seeking prior approval from the higher authority." On the issue of validity of assessm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f approval from higher authority for converting limited scrutiny to the detailed scrutiny nor the Id. CIT(A) has given detailed reason along with the points for determination of his decision as prescribed in section 250(6) of the I.T. Act. Therefore, we are of the view that it would be appropriate to restore this case of the assessee to the file of the Id. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after obtaining report from the Assessing Officer as discussed supra in this order. Therefore, we restore this case to the file of the Id. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh as directed above. Accordingly, this gerund of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances, and the submissions of bot .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X