Dismissing the petition the Court held that the assessee has not submitted any satisfactory explanation regarding the discrepancy at the time of assessment proceedings or at the time of penalty proceedings and discrepancy was accepted; contention that only GP should be added to income cannot be accepted; CIT was justified in rejecting revision petition. Order of single judge affirmed. (AY.2009-10)
Chhattisgarh Steel Castings (P) Ltd. v PCIT (2025) 347 CTR 857 / 255 DTR 408 / 306 Taxman 28 (Chhattisgarh)(HC) Editorial :Chhattisgarh Steel Castings (P) Ltd. v CIT (2025) 304 Taxman 447 / 347 CTR 861 / 255 DTR 412 (Chhattisgarh) 412 affirmed.
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Not submitted any satisfactory explanation regarding the discrepancy at the time of assessment proceedings or at the time of penalty proceedings-Contention that only GP should be added to income was not accepted-Order of single judge rejecting the petition under section 264 against concealment penalty was affirmed.[S. 271(1)(c), Art. 226]
Leave a Reply