VEENA ESTATES P.LTD. vs COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX MUMBAI CITY-IX,MUMBAI.

ITXA-302-2002.docx 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This Appeal was admitted on 14 September 2004 on the following substantial question of law:- “Whether the Tribunal erred on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law in reversing the order of the CIT(A) and confirming the penalty of Rs.33,34,096/- (Rupees Thirty three Lacs Thirty Four ITXA-302-2002.docx Thousand Ninety Six only) levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act?” 3. The Appellant tried to raise additional grounds in support of this Appeal. However, a detailed order dated 11 January 2024, passed by G. S. Kulkarni and Jitendra Jain, JJ, did not allow this. 4. Ms. Aarti Vissanji, submitted that the Appellant had neither concealed any fact nor furnished any inaccurate particulars. She submitted that withdrawal of money from the partnership firm M/s. Nirmal Enterprises and the consequent reduction in capital balance to Rs.17,45,000/- was reflected in the capital accounts and the income return. She submitted that once primary facts were disclosed, it was up to the Assessing Officer to decide what inferences could be drawn from them. She submitted that because no such inferenc