Held, that the additions were made on estimation of total turnover after rejecting the books of account. Notices under section 133(6) issued to various purchase parties were all returned by the postal authority and the assessee had not produced the party in confirmation. Order of CIT(A) deleting the penalty is affirmed. (AY.2010-11)
ITO v. Sunil Bhagwandas Vorani (HUF) (2024)114 ITR 146 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Reassessment-Bogus purchases-Notice issued to parties returned as unserved by postal authorities-Addition on estimate basis-Deletion of penalty is affirmed. [S. 133(6), 147]
Leave a Reply