SATISH PANDURANG PAWAR,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ITO WARD 2(1),NASHIK/, NASHIK
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed
ITA 363/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2023AY 2016-17
Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.363/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Satish Pandurang Pawar, The Income Tax Officer, 602, Royal Orchid, Near Indian Vs Ward-2(1), Nashik. Oil Petrol Pump, Katraj Bypass, Ambegaon, Pune – 411046. Pan: Abfpp 1207 Q Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Yogesh Gawali – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani, Irs – Dr Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Date Of Hearing 03/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Dated 27.02.2023 Emanating From The Penalty Order Dated 24.01.2022 Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Cit Is Not Justified In Raising Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of Rs.2,36,100/- On The Ground That The Assesses Has Furnish Inaccurate Particulars Of Income Without Appreciating That Satish Pandurang Pawar [A]
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274
House
Property and thus reduced the total income. In this case, it was only because of survey conducted by Department, the wrong claims were detected. The assessee had never voluntarily disclosed his wrong claims.
8. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs N G technologies Ltd [2015]
370 ITR 7 (Delhi