The appeal filed by the Revenue arose from the
order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre under section 250 of the
Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to Assessment Year 2007-08. The impugned
appellate order had deleted the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under
section 271(1)(c) of the Act.
During the relevant assessment year, the Assessing
Officer made an addition of ₹1,35,719, being 6% of alleged bogus
purchases amounting to ₹22,61,986. Based on this estimated addition, the
Assessing Officer levied a penalty of ₹41,940, representing 100% of the
tax sought to be evaded, on the ground of furnishing inaccurate particulars of
income.
Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee
preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner
(Appeals), after considering the submissions, deleted the penalty by relying on
the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT, Mumbai, in the case of Ajay
Loknath Lohia vs ITO, wherein it was held that penalty under section
271(1)(c) is not sustainable when the underlying addition is made on an
estimated basis.
The Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the
Tribunal. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee.
After hearing the Departmental Representative and examining the record, the
Tribunal observed that the penalty had been levied solely on the basis of an
estimated addition.
The Tribunal noted that it is a settled legal
position, consistently followed by the ITAT Mumbai Benches, that penalty under
section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained where the addition is based on
estimation. The Tribunal further observed that the Revenue was unable to place
any contrary judicial precedent to rebut the reliance placed by the
Commissioner (Appeals) on the coordinate bench decision.
Finding no infirmity in the order of the
Commissioner (Appeals), the Tribunal upheld the deletion of penalty and
dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.
SOURCE: https://itat.gov.in/public/files/upload/1767782037-5HdpPx-1-TO.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general
information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify
the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal,
professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim
all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been
prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment