SHRI AJAYKUMAR BATRA,,BANDARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 7,, NAGPUR
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed
ITA 19/NAG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2010-11
Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.19/Nag/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010–11 Ajaykumar Batra, Prop. M/S. Saibaba Construction, Rajgopalchari Ward, Bandara-441904. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Abjpa9287H बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-7, ……""यथ" / Respondent Nagpur. Assessee By : Shri Kailash M. Jogani, Ca & Shri Mukesh R. Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Ii, Nagpur Dated 22.09.2014 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. The Order Passed Is Illegal, Invalid & Bad In Law. 2. The Act Of Learned A.O. Levying The Penalty Of Rs.16,97,544/- U/S 271(1)(C) Is Unjustified. 3. The Learned A.O. Erred In Charging Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) For Concealment Of Income. But There Is No Concealment At All. The Income Offered U/S. 133A Was Jut To Cover Up The Discrepancies, Avoid Further Litigation & To Buy A Peace. 4. Any Other Ground Shall Be Prayed At The Time Of Hearing.”
For Appellant: Shri Kailash M. Jogani, CA &For Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)
11. Considering the above, we are of the opinion that the legal requirement of making a clear cut reference to the applicable limb of clause (c) of section 271(1) of the Act, is not met by the Assessing
Officer while initiating and levying the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
Thus, the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer
