PANKAJ CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, was also\ninitiated for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of\n\n3\n\nhis income. Accordingly notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) dated 10.07.2017, was\nissued and served on the assessee.\n\nThereafter, rectification u/s 154

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAKJOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, was also\ninitiated for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of\n3\nhis income. Accordingly notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) dated 10.07.2017, was\nissued and served on the assessee.\n7.\nThereafter, rectification u/s 154

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, was also\ninitiated for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of\n3\nITA No.76 to 81/RJT/2022 (AY 8-09 to 12-13 & 14-15)\nPankaj C Lodhiya\nhis income. Accordingly notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) dated 10.07.2017, was\nissued and served on the assessee.\n7. Thereafter, rectification

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACTIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, was also\ninitiated for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of\n3\nH\nITA No.76 to 81/RJT/2022 (AY 8-09 to 12-13 & 14-15)\nPankaj C Lodhiya\nhis income. Accordingly notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) dated 10.07.2017, was\nissued and served on the assessee.\n7.\nThereafter

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, was also\ninitiated for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of\n3\nITA No.76 to 81/RJT/2022 (AY 8-09 to 12-13 & 14-15)\nPankaj C Lodhiya\nH\nhis income. Accordingly notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) dated 10.07.2017, was\nissued and served on the assessee.\n7.\nThereafter

SHRI LAJAI SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI,LAJAI vs. THE ITO, WARD-3, MORBI

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

271(l)(c) of Rs. 32,932/-without properly considering that the Ld. A.O. has erred in not giving adequate time and opportunity although the assessee specifically requested for the same. The penalty needs deletion. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering that the Ld. A.O. has bringing any cogent material justifying levy of penalty. The penalty

SHRI RAHENDRASINH P. JADEJA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Itano.562/Rjt/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Shri Rahendrasinh P. Jadeja, D.C.I.T, Pradhuman Villa, Vs. Central Circle-2, Opp. Neel Da Dhaba, Rajkot. Kalawad Road, Rajkot. Pan: Abopj5431H

u/s 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Asstt. Year 2008-09 4 Act is compensatory in nature. Therefore he should be given credit with effect from the day of the seizure of cash. 5. However, the ''Ld.CIT (A) disregarded the contention of the assessee by observing that the cash seized as a result of the search can be appropriated