M/S. KASHISH ENTERPRISE,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed
ITA 256/RJT/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Oct 2018AY 2009-10
Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 256/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Kashish Enterprise Vs. Ito, Poonam Apartment, New Ward – 2, Station Road, Bhuj-Kutch Bhuj. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M. J. Ranpura, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Praveen Verma, Sr. D. R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Appellate Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Rajkot [“Cit(A)” In Short] Relevant To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- "1.0 The Grounds Of Appeal Mentioned Hereunder Are Without Prejudice To One Another. 2.0 The Ld Cit(A)-Ii, Rajkot [Cit(A)] Erred In Facts As Also In Retaining Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On Income Of Rs.55,53,360/-. The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act May Kindly Be Deleted. 3.0 The Honor’S Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Alter Or Withdraw Any Or More Grounds Of Appeal On Or Before The Hearing Of Appeal.”
For Appellant: Shri M. J. Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr. D. R
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274
3. The solitary issue raised by assessee is that ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for Rs. 55,53,360/-.
2
Kashish Enterprises vs. ITO.
AY : 2009-10
4. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is partnership firm and engaged in the business of Civil Construction. There was a survey
