1.Assessment was completed u\/s 143(3)\/147 making additions on account of discrepancies found in survey on account of Cash in hand and Stock in trade etc.<\/p>\n
2.On appeal the additions made by A.O. were confirmed by CIT(A)\u00a0 vide order dated 06\/02\/2020 and ITAT order dated 08\/07\/2016.<\/p>\n
3.Penalty u\/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.4,60,000 was levied vide order dated 26\/04\/2017.<\/p>\n
4.On appeal CIT(A) deleted the Penalty on the sole ground taken regarding limitation stating that – “order of the ITAT\u00a0 was passed on\u00a0 08\/07\/2016 , therefore the penalty order must have been passed by the A.O. upto\u00a0 31\/03\/2017. However the A.O.\u00a0 has passed the order on 26\/04\/2017 which is beyond the prescribed time limit as mentioned in section 275(1)(a) of the I.T. Act.<\/p>\n
5.Against the order of the CIT(A) department has filed appeal on two grounds :<\/p>\n
(i) Order of the CIT(A) was received in the office of the principal CIT\u00a0 on 07\/10\/2016 and therefore penalty order dated. 26\/04\/2017 is within time.<\/p>\n
(ii) The case of the assessee is covered under exceptions as per para- 10(a) of the circular no.03\/2018 dated 1107\/2018 f CBDT and further amendments thereto on 20\/08\/2018.<\/p>\n
Query :<\/p>\n
1.How far ground no. 1 & 2 of the department is justified?<\/p>\n
2.Whether penalty is covered in CBDT circular of low tax effect?<\/p>\n
If yes , any case law of CBDT circular in support of the same.<\/p>\n
3.The assessee has not filed cross objection in ITAT whether now the assessee can challenge the penalty notice on the ground that –<\/p>\n
‘ Have concealed the particulars of income<\/p>\n
or<\/p>\n
furnished inaccurate particulars of such income’<\/p>\n
In the penalty notice it has\u00a0 not been specified whether the charge is on one ground or the other.<\/p>\n
Your valuable detailed reply will be highly appreciated.<\/p>\n
Thanks & Regards<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","qa_expert":[33],"qa_category":[23],"qa_tag":[344,350],"class_list":["post-21341","qa","type-qa","status-publish","hentry","qa_expert-advocate-shashi-ashok-bekal","qa_category-income-tax","qa_tag-concealment-penalty","qa_tag-cross-objection"],"acf":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa\/21341","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/qa"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21341"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21341"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"qa_expert","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa_expert?post=21341"},{"taxonomy":"qa_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa_category?post=21341"},{"taxonomy":"qa_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/qa_tag?post=21341"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}