JAGANI VINODRAI GOPALDAS (HUF),RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (2) (4),, RAJKOT
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 59/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15
Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 59/Rjt/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Jagani Vinodrai Gopaldas Huf, Income-Tax Officer, 62 – Suraj Appartment, Vs. Ward-1(2)(4), No.1 Shroff Road, Rajkot. Opp. Church, Nfac, Delhi Rajkot-360001. Pan: Aaahj9710N
For Appellant: Shri R.D Lalchandani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.L Solanki, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 271(1)(c)
u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the same can be under the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
7.1
Moving further, we note that it is a trite law that every addition or disallowance made during the assessment proceedings cannot be treated either concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and thereby levying the penalty. The phrase furnishing