MARUTI TRADING CO,JAGAATSINGHPUR vs. ITO WARD PARADEEP, PARADEEP
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed
ITA 213/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2023AY 2015-16
Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2015-16 Maruti Trading Co., Maruti Trading Co., Panisalia, Vs. Ito, Ward, Paradeep. Ito, Ward, Paradeep. Jagatsinghpur. Jagatsinghpur. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aalfm 3677 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/0 /08/2023 O R D E R
For Appellant: Shri P.R.MohantyFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)
TDS has been given effect in the return of income.
Admittedly, penalty proceedings are separate and independent proceedings.
The Assessing Officer had a duty to examine the same. The Assessing
Officer has not dislodged the submission of the assessee. This being so, on this ground itself, the penalty as levied in respect of addition of Rs.1,04,912/- is liable
