This Revenue s appeal for A.Y. 2008-09, arises from order of the CIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad dated 28-08-2015, deleting the penalty of Rs. 18,02,877/-, in proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short  the .

2. In this case return of income declaring income of Rs. 1,50,59,284/- was filed on 30 th September, 2008. Subsequently, the order u/s. 143(3) of the act was passed on 14 th December, 2010 by determining the total income at Rs. 5,71,31,833/- after making the following additions:- 1 Unexplained unsecured loans 39,43, 083/- 2 Unexplained creditors 4,10,72,257/- 3 G.P. addition 4,30,19,408/- ITA No. 3135/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year 2008-09 I.T.A No. 3135/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No DCIT vs. M/s. Aahar Products Pvt. Ltd 2 The ld. CIT(A) has provided part relief and restricted the GP addition to the extent of Rs. 53,04,140/-. During the course of penalty proceeding he assessing officer has responded that vide letter dated 4 th March, 2004 stating that all necessary particulars were submitted and no discrepancy has been pointed out in the submission and penalty cannot be levied merely on the basis of addition which have been partly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessing officer has not accepted the explanation stating that books result was rejected as per provision of section 145(iii) and gross profit of the assessee was determined after making comparison with other companies engaged in the similar nature of business. Consequently, the assessing officer has levied penalty of Rs. 18,02,877/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of its income.

3. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied by the assessing officer stating that lump sum addition was made which is purely subjective and would not lead to conclusion that assessee has concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. During the course of penalty proceedings before us, the ld. counsel has supported the order of the assessing officer. On the other hand, no-body has attended from the side of the assessee.

4. We have perused the material on record and noticed that the assessing officer has estimated the gross profit on the ground that it is on the lower side in comparison to the other companies. However we observe that assessee has made this addition without establishing that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. Therefore, after considering the detailed findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and a number of judicial pronouncements elaborated by the ld. CIT(A), we do not find any reason to interfere with the decision of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

5. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16-04-2018 Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. GODARA) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No. 3135/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No DCIT vs. M/s. Aahar Products Pvt. Ltd 3 Ahmedabad : Dated 16/04/2018 &G6  $ 2 *  G 7$ / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-

1. Assessee

2. Revenue

3. Concerned CIT

4. CIT (A)

5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6. Guard file. By order/&G6 8G , * /89>/ *@>0 /0 *@2 /  0# , 9.&>,>&