SHRI.PRAKASH R. NAIR,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAM
In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 141/COCH/2021[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2024AY 2000-2001
Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80Section 801A(9)Section 80HSection 80I
…manner, penalty was levied for the same reasons, finding the assessee’s offer of an additional sum of Rs.180.40 lakhs in assessment (subject to the deduction u/s. 80HHC), as inadequate. Reliance was placed on the decision in Patel Chemical Works v. CIT [2004] 265 ITR 273 (Guj), wherein it stands held that Revenue is under no obligation to find the overall effect of receipt of tax by the Revenue, i.e., taking into account that, if any, paid by the assessee’s sister concern/s. Once tax is found to have been avoided by the assessee, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is exigible. The penalty order was passed without noticing th…