Trade Wings Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 2(3)(3), Mumbai
In the result , appeal of the assessee company in ITA No
ITA 3419/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2009-10
Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3417/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3418/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3419/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Trade Wings Limited, Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ 18/20-K, Dubash Marg, 2(3)(3), V. Fort,Mumbai – 400 023. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact4639F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)
For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)
…fixed assets and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be levied merely on the reason that there were non-production of documentary evidences. The assessee company relied on the decision of Chennai Tribunal reported in Gem Granites (Karnatka) v. DCIT (2009)120 TTJ 992(Chennai. Trib.). The assessee company submitted that merely because the learned CIT(A) has confirmed the quantum assessment additions, penalty cannot be levied as the Revenue has to prove the onus that the assessee has concealed particulars of income or furnished in-accurate particulars of income. The assessee company submitted that the assessee…
