M/S P.N. GADGIL & SONS,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 6, PUNE
In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is partly allowed
ITA 1921/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1921/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. P. N. Gadgil & Sons, Vs. Dcit, Circle-6, Pune. Abhiruchi Mall, 4Th Floor, 59C Sinhagad Road, Pune- 411041. Pan : Aanfp4476C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri M. R. Bhagwat Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 15.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 02.08.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Learned Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Erred In Confirming Penalty Of Rs.23,20,000/- Levied Under Section 272B(2). 2) The Learned Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Erred In Sustaining The Penalty At Rs.23,20,000/- When There Was Only One Default & As Such Penalty Could At The Must Be Sustained At Rs.10,000/- Only. 3) The Learned Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Erred In Sustaining The Penalty Even Though There Was A Reasonable Cause For Assessee'S Failure To Obtain Pan Of Its Retail Customers. 4) The Penalty Levied Be Cancelled Or Reduced To Rs. 10,000/-.
For Appellant: Shri M. R. BhagwatFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133ASection 139ASection 139A(5)(c)Section 272Section 272BSection 272B(2)
133A of the I T Act, I am of the opinion that no interference is required in the penalty order. Hence
4
the penalty of Rs. 23,20,000/- is upheld. All the grounds raised in this appeal are dismissed.”
5. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
6. Ld. AR appearing from
