9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 61 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Limited Company engaged in Real Estate Development, Builder and Civil Contractor. For the Asst. Year 2013-14, assessee filed its Return of Income on 21-09-2013 declaring total income of Rs. 39,46,540/-. Regular assessment u/s. 143(3) was made disallowing sub contract payments made to M/s. Limestone Properties Pvt. Ltd. as nongenuine and 40% of the same namely Rs. 2,63,44,508/- was treated as bogus expenses by rejecting the books of accounts. On appeal against the assessment order, Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance and estimated to 7% of the profit instead of 40% disallowed by the A.O. 3. On further a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Pvt. Ltd. as non-genuine. Whereas the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance at 7% which was confirmed by ITAT. The following case laws makes it very clear that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be levied against the estimation of income, therefore the penalty levied by the lower authorities liable to be deleted. Sr. No. Case Law Citation Judicial Forum 1 Subhash Trading Co. 221 ITR110 Gujarat 2 Navjivan Oil Mills 252ITR417 Gujarat 3 Valmikbhai H Patel 280 ITR 487 Gujarat 4 Bombaywala Readymade Stores 55 taxmann.com 258 Gujarat 5 Hariyana Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. 741 of 2009 Gujarat 6 I - serve Systems Pvt. Ltd. 1044/Ahd/2018 Ahmedabad 7 Anil Abhubhai Odedara 117 taxmann.com 490 Rajkot 8 Thakorbhai & Comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1)(c) could be levied for concealment of income Held, yes [Para 6] [In favour of assessee]" 8.2. The Co-ordinate Bench of Surat decision in the case of Thakorbhai & Company Vs. ITO (In ITA No. 641/Srt/2023 order dated 06/11/2023 wherein it was held as follow: "5. I have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the record carefully. I find that the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order, noted that the has shown purchases in cash aggregating to Rs. 77,03,224/-. The Assessing Officer after giving show cause notice, disallowed 50% of such purchases. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to the extent o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
