2022 (6) TMI 1513

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by Revenue has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi, dated 08.04.2019 relating to the A.Y. 2009-2010. 2. The relevant facts as culled from the material on record are as under: 2.1. The assessee is an individual and proprietor of M/s. K.K. International, New Delhi. The assessee filed return of income for the A.Y. 2009-10 on 30.09.2009 declaring income of Rs. 41,78,820/- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eleting the penalty on the aforesaid addition, he noted that the addition has been deleted in appellate order and, therefore, the penalty on such addition does not survive. With respect to the addition of Rs. 35,87,182/- made under section 40(a)(ia), he upheld the levy of penalty. 3. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) to the extent of relief granted by him, the Revenue is now in appeal before t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ngs and, therefore, the penalty on such addition does not survive. Before us, no material has been placed by the Revenue to point-out any fallacy in the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) nor has Revenue placed any material to demonstrate that the addition on which the impugned penalty has been levied has been upheld by higher Judicial Forum. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X