ITA No.255/Ind/2024 (Smt. Mohini Shrivastava vs. ITO 1(1), Indore)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Smt. Mohini Shrivastava, has appealed against the penalty order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2009-10. The assessee has raised grounds of appeal arguing that the penalty levied is arbitrary, baseless, and unlawful. The assessee contends that the difference in the sale consideration and the valuation report does not amount to concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The assessee's legal representative submitted that the Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for determining the fair market value of the property, which was determined at Rs.30,08,800/- by the DVO. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.7,08,800/- under section 50C of the Act, and levied a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is arbitrary, baseless, and unlawful.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Sanjeev Kumar vs. Central Circle-14

  Delhi bench

• C & S Electric Limited vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre

  Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Mrs.Pratibha Ashokumar Godha Vs The ITO, Ward-1

  Ahmedabad bench

• VIVEK OMPRAKASH ABROL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

  Mumbai bench

• Shree Krishna Vanaspati Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(3), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• M/s Vijay Jewellers vs Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

  Mumbai bench