Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Santosh Kumar Burnwal Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
Related Assessment Year : 2009-10
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Santosh Kumar Burnwal Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) No 271(1)(c) Penalty on Peak Credit Additions: ITAT Deletes Penalty After Quantum Relief on Estimated Basis The Kolkata ITAT deleted penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) after holding that once quantum addition itself is restricted on the basis of peak credit theory and estimated computation, penalty for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot survive. The assessee, Santosh Kumar Burnwal, had originally faced addition of ₹1.70 crore on account of unexplained cash deposits in an ICICI Bank account. During appellate proceedings, the...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930