TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The only issue is regarding penalty levied under section 271(1)(c). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that all material facts relevant for the assessment in this case were filed before the Assessing Officer and therefore, no case of penalty under section 271 (1)(c) of the Act is made out by the Department. Ld. DR has opposed the submission of the Learned Counsel for the assessee. He has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the year under consideration and stated that the above investment has been made by him from the income earned in the current accounting year from gambling. Regarding payment of tax due on this additional income, the assessee requested the concerned CIT to auction the ornaments seized from him and adjust the proceeds thereof against the tax due from him and despite such letters the Assessing Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion with regard to the assets of the appellant. In these facts of the case, the CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty by observing that such an invalid request cannot be construed as a constructive payment of taxes. We find that this approach of the CIT(A) is not sustainable. In case, the Assessing Officer did not accept such request letter signed by the Chartered Accountant of the assessee, he should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
