Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services -- Free for one month.\n\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar\nThe Income-Tax Officer,, Jalandhar vs Smt. Baneet Kaur Bhasin,, Jalandhar on 21 August, 2023\n  IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n        AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.\n\nBEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n\n                I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018\n                Assessment Year:2009-10\n\n\nSmt. Baneet Kaur Bhasin Prop. Vs. Income    Tax     Officer,\nM/s Bepco (India), H. No.         Ward-1(1), Jalandhar.\n7/235, New Vijay Nagar,\nJalandhar.\n[PAN: -AJSPB8324M]\n(Appellant)                        (Respondent)\n\n                I.T.A. No. 263/Asr/2014\n                Assessment Year:2009-10\n\n\nIncome Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vs. Smt. Baneet Kaur Bhasin\nJalandhar.                         Prop. M/s Bepco (India),\n                                   H. No. 7/235, New Vijay\n                                   Nagar, Jalandhar.\n (Appellant)                       [PAN: -AJSPB8324M]\n                                    (Respondent)\n\n     Appellant by         None\n     Respondent by        Sh. Digvijai Kumar Chaudhary,\n                          Sr. DR.\n\n\n     Date of Hearing           08.08.2023\n     Date of Pronouncement     21.08.2023\n\n\n                       ORDER\n                                                        I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                      & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      2\n                                                         & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\nPer: Bench:\n\n      The instant appeal of the assessee and the revenue were filed against the\n\norder of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) Jalandhar, (in brevity\n\n'the CIT(A)') order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brevity\n\nthe Act) for assessment year 2009-10. The impugned order was emanated from\n\nthe order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Jalandhar, (in brevity the ld.\n\nAO) order passed u/s 143(3) & 271(1)(c) of the Act.\n\n2.    When the appeals are called for a hearing, none was present on behalf of\n\nthe assessee. No adjournment petition was filed on behalf of the assessee. On\n\nperusal of record we find that the date was fixed several times but none was\n\npresent to represent the appeal. Considering the issue, we proceed to dispose of\n\nthe appeal on ex parte qua for assessee after hearing the ld. DR.\n\n3. The assessee has taken the following grounds:\n\n              "1. That the order of the CIT(A) to the extent sustaining the\n              additions made by the A.O is against the law and facts of the\n              case.\n\n              2. That the CIT(A) had failed to appreciate that the A.O despite\n              not being satisfied with the correctness and completeness of the\n              accounts of the assessee, had however proceeded with and\n                                          I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                        & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      3\n                                           & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\ndrawn adverse inferences without rejecting the latters 'Books of\naccounts', and rather had acted upon the same.\n\n3. That the CIT(A) had gravely erred in law and facts of the\ncase in upholding the addition of Rs. 10,25,395/- pertaining to\nthe 'Opening balances' of the 'Sundry creditors', in the hands\nof the assessee during the year under consideration.\n\n4. That the CIT(A) had gravely erred in law and facts of the\ncase in confirming the addition of Rs. 48,03,967/- so made by\nthe A.O in the hands of the assessee.\n\n5. That the CIT(A) brushing aside the duly substantiated claim\nof the assessee that as the amount of Rs. 48,03,967/- was the\namount generated from the 'Sales' which remained unrecorded\nin the 'Books of accounts', therefore addition only as regards\nthe 'Profit' pertaining to such 'Unrecorded sales' was liable to\nmade, however without dislodging the said claim of the\nassessee, had proceeded with most arbitrarily and made an\naddition of the entire amount of Rs. 48,03,967/- in the hands of\nthe assessee.\n\n6. That the CIT(A) while upholding the addition of Rs.\n48,03,967/-, therein failed . to appreciate that where the\n'Purchases' are accounted but however the correlating 'Sales'\nremain unrecorded, leading to inflated 'Closing stock' as per\nthe 'Books of accounts', therein while recasting the 'Trading\nresults' for deducing the 'True income' of the assessee, the\n'Sales' are to be 'inflated', and the 'Cl. Stock' is to be\n                                                      I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                    & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      4\n                                                       & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n            'deflated', as a consequence whereto the addition in the hands\n            of the assessee would be restricted to the amount of 'Profit' on\n            such 'Unrecorded sales'.\n\n            7. That the CIT(A) had gravely erred in law and facts of the\n            case in confirming the addition of Rs. 17,65,239/- in the hands\n            of the assessee.\n\n            8. That the CIT(A) had gravely erred in law and facts of the\n            case in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 2,80,000/- made by\n            the A.O u/s 40A(3) of the 'Act'.\n\n            9. Any other grounds as may be allowed to be raised at the time\n            of hearing of the appeal."\n\n3.1. The revenue has taken the following grounds:\n\n            "1.   That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,\n            the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs.\n            1,47,22,107/- out of total addition of Rs. 2,23,16,618/- rightly\n            made by the A.O. on account of excess of assets over liabilities\n            u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n\n            2.    That, it is prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set-\n            aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored.\n\n            3.    That the appellant requests for leave to add or amend or\n            alter the grounds of appeal before the appeal is heard and\n            disposed of."\n                                                      I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                    & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      5\n                                                       & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n4.    Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee was\n\nrunning business of trading of paint and allied products and proprietress of M/s\n\nBepco (India) Jalandhar. Assessment was framed U/s 143(3) of the Act. The\n\nadditions were made in two heads related to bogus sundry creditors amount to\n\nRs. 2,23,16,618/- and addition on account of violation of section 40A(3) amount\n\nto Rs. 2,80,000/- in assessment proceeding. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal\n\nbefore the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.\n\nThe additions related to sundry creditors is deleted amount to Rs. 1,47,22,107/-\n\nout of total addition amount to Rs. 2,23,16,618/-. But the additions were\n\nsustained by the ld. CIT(A) the amount to Rs. 10,25395.03 on account of\n\nopening sundry creditors, the amount to Rs. 48,03,967/- on account of bogus\n\nsales, the amount of Rs. 17,65,239/- on account of bogus sundry creditors and\n\nthe amount to Rs. 2,80,000/- on account of violation of Sec 40A(3) of the\n\nAct.Both the partied being aggrieved filed the appeals before us by challenging\n\nthe appeal order.\n\n5. The ld. DR vehemently argued and relied on the assessment order. Thy ld.\n\nDR first invited our attention indifferent paragraphs of appeal order which are\n\nreproduced as below: -\n\n5.1. The appeal order pages 28 to 30 is inserted as below:\n                                          I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                        & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      6\n                                           & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n"6.4 I have considered the observations of the Assessing Officer\nas made by him in the assessment order as well as the remand\nreport. I have also considered the written submissions of the\nassessee as well as her counter comments on the report of the\nAssessing Officer. I have further considered the judicial\npronouncement(s) relied upon by the assessee on the issue under\nreference. On careful consideration of the assessment order,\nassessment records and other materials placed on record, it has\nbeen noticed that the Assessing Officer has made the addition of\nRs.2,23,16,618/- bn account of bogus sundry creditors by invoking\nthe provisions of section 69 of the Act as the assessee has failed to\nprove the genuineness of the creditors shown in the balance\nsheet/books to this extent. After obtaining the addresses from the\nassessee, the Assessing Officer asked for copy of account of the\nassessee directly u/s 133(6) of the Act from all the creditors shown\nin the books but either no response has been received from the\ncreditors or letters sent to them u/s 133(6) of the Act were received\nback un-served from almost all the creditors in whose case addition\nhas been made. The fact regarding non receipt of any information\nor the fact with regard to receipt of letters back undelivered was\nconveyed to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. In the absence of\nany satisfactory reply from the assessee with regard to the sundry\ncreditors which have been treated as bogus, the Assessing Officer\nconcluded that the creditors are bogus and proceeded to make an\naddition of Rs.2,23,16,618/- to the returned income of the assessee.\n                                          I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                        & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      7\n                                           & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n6.5 During the course of appellate proceedings, along with the\nwritten submissions, the assessee has filed copy of relevant pages\nof the cash book to describe the nature of the sundry creditors as\nappearing in his books of account. The extracts of cash book now\nbeing produced at appellate stage have also been confronted to the\nAssessing Officer. The extracts of cash book are not being treated\nas additional evidence as the Assessing Officer has himself\nadmitted that the assessee produced books of account without bills\nand vouchers. Although the present Assessing Officer has objected\nto the explanation being offered by the assessee but in my opinion\nif will be fare for the sake of justice to consider the explanation on\nits merits. It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer has not\nrejected the books of account at any stage and totally relied on the\nbalance sheet and trading cum profit & loss account to make\nvarious additions although it has been proposed by him to reject\nthe books of account.\n\n6.6 The assessee has tried to demonstrate that as to how the bogus\ncreditors appeared in her books of account. The assessee has\nbifurcated the bogus sundry creditors into three parts and\nsubmitted as under:-\n\n(i). OP. BALANCES AS ON 01/04/2008 - Party No. 21 (of the\naforesaid 'Chart'):\n\nThe amount as stood reflected in the 'Ledger a/c' of the following\nparty was the 'Op. Balance' for the year under consideration:-\n                                                           I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                         & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      8\n                                                            & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n                       S.No        PARTICULARS                 AMOUNT\n                       21.         M/s Shalimar Paints         Rs. 10,25,395-03\n\n\n\n            (Copy of the 'Ledger a/c' of M/s Shaliraar Paints [i.e L.F 101] is\n            enclosed herewith as Annexure 'A' -Page 16) .\n\n            According to the assessee, the aforesaid amount aggregating to Rs.\n            20,06,287/-(supra) represents the 'Opening Balances' of the\n            aforesaid parties. In further opinion of the assessee that as no\n            addition pertaining to the aforesaid amount had ever been made\n            during the year under consideration, no adverse inference as\n            regards the same (or any part thereto) was liable to be made in the\n            hands of the assessee while framing of the assessment for the year\n            under consideration. It has, therefore, been submitted that the\n            aforesaid addition of Rs. 10,25,395.03 made by the Assessing\n            Officer be deleted."\n\n5.2. The appeal order pages 46 to 48 is inserted as below:\n\n            "6.7 On careful consideration of the submissions made by the\n            assessee, I am of the opinion that the assessee has fairly conceded\n            that most of the sundry creditors (except that of a sister concerns)\n            are bogus creditors. It has surprisingly been noticed that in spite of\n            finding so many discrepancies in the maintenance of books of\n            account, the Assessing Officer has not chose to reject the books of\n            account. In my considered opinion, the explanation put forth by the\n                                          I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                        & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      9\n                                           & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\nassessee with the help of cash book and narration of entries with\nregard to sundry creditors appears to be reasonable. This is\napparent from the fact that the assessee has also admitted the\nunaccounted sales of Rs. 48,09,967/- which have not been recorded\nin the books of account although cash to the same extent has been\nintroduced in the books of account under the shadow of bogus\ncreditors. If the assessee had to make a storey, he would have\nconcealed the fact with regard to unaccounted sales also and\nwould not have conceded the unrecorded sales. The Assessing\nOfficer has not denied the fact either in the assessment order or in\nthe remand report that the Branch Office of the assessee at Gagret\nand other sale points at Ner Chowk and Mubarakpur were to\nreceive   Rs.54,34,244.42,    Rs.46,10,040/-    &     Rs.51,69,255.40\nrespectively from the Head office and other branch offices of the\nassessee and sale points as stated in the written submissions have\nalso not been denied. The assessee has very well explained the\nreasons for converting genuine creditors of the branch offices into\nbogus creditors. The same argument was taken by the assessee\nduring assessment proceedings. I found the explanation offered by\nthe assessee with regard to converting genuine sundry creditors in\nrespect of branch offices into bogus creditors as reasonable and\nacceptable. In these facts and in the circumstances of the case, the\naddition of Rs.l,47,22,017/-[Rs.48,40,974.71 + Rs.47,42,721.62 +\nRs.51,38,320.06] made by the Assessing Officer out of total\naddition of Rs.2,23,16,618/- is directed to be deleted.\n                                         I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                       & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      10\n                                          & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n6.8   With regard to the addition in respect of the creditors\nrepresented by opening balance, I am not in agreement with the\nsubmissions made by the assessee as it has not been proved with\ndocumentary evidence that the creditors represented by opening\nbalance are genuine creditors. Moreover, the Assessing Officer has\nalso invoked provisions of section 69 of the Act. In these facts and\nin the circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the\nAssessing Officer has correctly made the addition of Rs.\n10,25,395.03 which represents opening balance in the case of\nbogus sundry creditors. Therefore, addition of Rs. 10,25,395/-\nrepresented by opening balance in the case of sundry creditors is\nupheld.\n\n6.9   As    regards      the    unaccounted sales admitted by the\nassessee, I am also not in agreement with the theory put forward by\nthe assessee that the sales to the extent of Rs.48,03,967/- are\nsuppressed and closing stock to the extent of unaccounted sales\nminus gross profit on theses sales has been shown as excess. If we\nexcept the theory put forth by the assessee for argument sake, the\nopening stock of the next assessment year will have to be decreased\nand the profit of that year will be increased to that extent. The\nwhole exercise will be revenue neutral. The theory put forth by the\nassessee can also not be believed in view of the fact that the\naccounts of the assessee are audited on which the assessee has\nplaced heavy reliance. In fact the assessee has introduced his own\nunaccounted income to the extent of Rs.48,03,967/- into the books\nin the form of cash by introducing bogus sundry creditors to this\n                                                        I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                      & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018         11\n                                                          & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n extent. The fact that the cash has been introduced in the books to\n the extent of Rs.48,03,967/- has also not been denied by the\n assessee rather accepted. In these facts and in the circumstances of\n the case, I do not agree with the submissions of the assessee that\n only gross profit on admitted unaccounted sales of the assessee\n amounting to Rs.48,03,967/- should only be added to the income of\n the assessee. I, therefore, confirm the action of the Assessing\n Officer in making addition also to the extent of Rs.48,03,967/- in\n addition to Rs. 10,25,395/- confirmed earlier.\n\n 6.10 Moreover,          the assessee has not furnished any explanation\n with regard to the following sundry creditors:-\n\n S.No.     Particulars                                               Amount\n\n 1         Amritsar Paint & Chemical Inds., Putlighar, G. T. Road,   Rs.850779.00\n           Amritsar\n 11        Khalsa Plywood Store, Gurdaspur Road, Bhaini              Rs.869643.03\n\n 27        Span Coating (I) Pvt. Limited                             Rs.21522.00\n 35        Rebate and discount                                       Rs.23295.23\n\n           Total                                                     Rs.1765239.26\n\n\n\n\nIt means, the assessee has to say nothing with regard to the\ngenuineness of these creditors. In the absence of any explanation, the\naddition to the extent of Rs. 17,65,239/- made by the Assessing\nOfficer is also confirmed.\n                                                      I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                    & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018       12\n                                                        & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n           6.11    In view of the above discussion, the total addition which has\n           been confirmed out of total addition of Rs.2,23,16,618/- will come to\n           Rs.75,94,601/-[Rs. 17,65,239/- + Rs.48,03,967/- + Rs. 10,25,395/-].\n           The balance addition of Rs. 1,47,22,017/- out of total addition of\n           Rs.2,23,16,618/- made by the Assessing Officer is directed to be\n           deleted. In the result, ground of appeal No. (ii) taken by the assessee\n           is partly allowed."\n\n6.    We heard the submission of the ld. DR, relied on the orders of revenue\n\nauthorities and considered the available record.\n\nGrievance of Revenue, ITA No. 263/Asr/2014: -\n\nThe revenue has only grievance related to relief granted by the ld. CIT(A) on\n\naccount of bogus sundry creditors amount to Rs. 1,47,22,107/-. The assessee\n\nhad submitted relevant explanations before the appellate authority. The ld.\n\nCIT(A) allowed the ld. AO to examination the fact. The report was submitted by\n\nthe ld. AO which is inserted in appeal order paragraphs 6.2 the said paragraph is\n\nreproduced as below:\n\n             "6.2 The written submissions filed by the assessee were forwarded\n             to the Assessing    Officer for his comments/report. The report of\n             the Assessing Officer was received vide his office letter dated\n             18.02.2013, the relevant paras of which read as under:-\n                                           I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                         & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      13\n                                            & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\nKindly refer to your office letter No. CIT (A)/Jal/12-13/1659 dated\n01.01.2013 in the case cited in the subject above.\n\nIn this connection it is submitted as under:\n\n1.       In his submission, the assessee has claimed that to safeguard\nyour business interest and in order to avoid withdrawal of the bank\nfacilities, he submitted the names of M/s bepco (India), Ner Chowk,\nthe creditor with the names of nine different parties for Rs.\n4610040/-. He has not explained in his submission how the account\nof his sister concern was settled, neither it was explained at the\ntime of assessment. In the absence of any such explanation on this\naccount, the appeal of the assessee on this point has no locus\nstandi.\n\n2.       Similarly, the assessee has claimed that the credit of Rs.\n4072721/- in the name of his sister concern ms/ Bepco (india),\ngarget was transferred in the name of seven different parties. He\nhas not explained how the credit in the name of M/s Bepco (India),\ngarget was settled. As such the appeal of the assessee again does\nnot have any locus standi in the absence of any explanation on this\nissue.\n\n3. Further it has been claimed that the credits of Rs. 5138320/- in\nthe name of his sister concern m/s bepco (India), Mubarakpur were\ntransferred in the name of seven different parties. On this account\nagain the assessee has failed to explain how the credit in the names\nof the sister concern were settled.\n                                            I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                          & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      14\n                                             & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n4.    In respect of the under mentioned parties, it has been\nclaimed that the amount mentioned against each was received by\nthe assessee from time to time from these parties, had erroneously\nbeen so reflected in the books of accounts for the reasons best\nknown to his accountant who messed up the accounts of the\nassessee concern and its sister concern. The same were factually\nthe cash receipts' generated in the hands of the assessee from the\nsale receipts collected by the seal representative of the assessee\nconcern from different sale point of the assessee concern\nthroughout the year, which for the aforesaid reasons had reminded\nomitted to be recorded, while for the purchase pertaining to the\nsaid sales stood duly recorded in the books of account, pursuant\nwhereto the assessee who was not maintain any stock records and\nhad carried out the stock valuation on the basis of the\npurchase/sales recorded in the books. On the basis of these facts it\nhas been claimed that the assessee erroneously valued the closing\nstock at an inflated value in the closing stock.\n\nWhile regard to these submissions in para 4, it is to point out at the\ntime of the assessment the assessee failed to furnish details of\nopening and closing stock, , which he now calms to have valued at\ninflated   cost.   The   assessee   has    furnished      any     evidence\ncorroborating a his/her claim as above. In the absence of any\nquantities details of purchase and sale the plea of eth assessee\ncannot be accepted. The details of these parties/creditors is given\nbelow:\n                                                              I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                            & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018         15\n                                                                  & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n                              S.No     Name of the party            Amount\n\n                                       M/s Archana Color Paint      798547/-\n                              1.\n                                       M/s Gurhar Kamal             799547/-\n                              2.\n                              3.       M/s Harpreet Cloth house     798520/-\n\n                              4.       M/s Karan Enterprises        816641/-\n\n                              5.       M/s Stylish Color Zone       797584/-\n\n                                       M/s Yash Thinner & Chemical 799128/-\n                              6.\n                                       Total                        4809967/-\n\n\n\n\n            In view of the facts discussed in details above, the appeal of the\n            assessee as above to be dismissed."\n\n6.1. The ld. DR submitted the written submission. The relevant paragraph is\n\ninserted as below:\n                                                     I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                   & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      16\n                                                      & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\n\n\nThe revenue has raised the question that the ld. CIT(A) had not considered the\n\ngolden rule for verification of sundry creditors i.e.,identity of party, mode of\n\ntransaction, creditworthiness. Even the paper documents of the parties are not\n\nconsidered. There is no such evidence that can satisfythe genuineness of sundry\n\ncreditors. We dismiss the observation of the ld. CIT(A) and appeal order is set\n                                                       I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                     & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      17\n                                                        & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\naside. We remit back the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee\n\nshould get proper opportunity for represent the matter in set aside proceeding.\n\n7.    In the result, the appeal of the revenue ITA No. 263/Asr/2014 is allowed\n\nfor statistical purpose.\n\nGrievance of assessee, ITA No. 246/Asr/2014: -\n\n8. The assessee has challenged multiple issue. Related the sundry creditors we\n\ntake the view that matter should be re-adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A) in setaside\n\nproceeding. So, the bogus sundry creditors amount to Rs. 17,65,239/- is\n\nremitted back in the file of the CIT(A). The addition of opening Sundry creditor\n\namount to Rs. 10,25,329/- is not related to this year. There is no observation\n\nabout verification of earlier year documents. The reasonable opportunity of the\n\nassessee was denied. The matter is remitted back in the file of the CIT(A) for\n\nadjudication.\n\nThe addition of entire undisclosed/ bogus sales amount to Rs. 48,03,967/- by the\n\nld. CIT(A). the assessee prayed for restricting the addition by applying Gross\n\nprofit rate of impugned assessment year. The matter is remitted back to the file\n\nof the ld. CIT(A) with the direction of the bench as indicated above.\n                                                       I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                     & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018      18\n                                                        & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\nThe assessee's submission related to addition for contravening section 40A(3)\n\nof the Act amount to Rs. 2,80,000/- was not considered properly by the ld.\n\nCIT(A). the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication\n\nde novo. The ld. DR has not made any objection against this issue.\n\nNeedless to say, the assessee should get reasonable opportunity of hearing in set\n\naside proceeding before the ld. CIT(A).\n\nConsidering above, assessee's ground nos. 1,2 & 9 are general in nature.\n\nAssessee's ground nos. 5 & 6 are allowed and ground nos. 3,4,7 & 8 are\n\nallowed for statistical purpose.\n\n9. In the result, appeal of the assessment ITA No. 246/Asr/2014 is partly\n\nallowed for statistical purpose.\n\nPenalty, ITA No. 251/Asr/2018\n\n10. The assessee's appeal related imposition of penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Act\n\namount to Rs. 23,40,338/-. As both the quantum appeals of assessee and\n\nrevenue are remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A), accordingly the\n\nimposition of penalty is to recalculate after the setting aside order of the ld.\n\nCIT(A). We remit back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for further\n\nadjudication of penalty after determination of quantum appeals. The ld. DR has\n\nnot made any objection against this issue.\n                                                      I.T.A. No. 246/Asr/2014\n                                                    & ITA No. 251/Asr/2018         19\n                                                        & ITA No. 263/Asr/2014\n\n\nNeedless to say, the assessee should get reasonable opportunity of hearing in set\n\naside proceeding before the ld. CIT(A).\n\n11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No. 251/Asr/2018 is allowed\n\nfor statistical purpose.\n\n              Order pronounced in the open court on 21.08.2023\n\n             Sd/-                                                           Sd/-\n\n (Dr. M. L. Meena)                                 (ANIKESH BANERJEE)\nAccountant Member                                       Judicial Member\n\nAKV\n\nCopy of the order forwarded to:\n\n  (1)The Appellant\n  (2) The Respondent\n  (3) The CIT\n(4) The CIT (Appeals)\n (5) The DR, I.T.A.T.\n                                            True Copy\n                                             By order