IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH SMC, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN (JM) I.T.A. NO.298/RJT/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01) THE ITO, WD.5(2) VS SHRI RAMESH CHHAGANLAL PATEL RAJKOT CHARITABLE TRUST, 102, SILVER CHAMBER TAGORE ROAD, RAJKOT PAN : AACTS9210Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.47/RJT/2011 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.298/RJT/2011) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01) SHRI RAMESH CHHAGANLAL PATEL VS THE ITO, WD.5(2) CHARITABLE TRUST, RAJKOT RAJKOT (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI M.K. SINGH ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DM RINDANI O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD DATED 01-04-2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL AND THE CROSS OBJECTION WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, BOTH THE REPRESENT ATIVES FOR THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.3 LAKHS. HOWEVER, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT AN A PPEAL WAS PENDING BEFORE THE HIGH COURT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL I N THE QUANTUM APPEAL. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH AS TO WHETHER ANY INTERIM ORDE R WAS PASSED BY THE HIGH ITA NO. 298/RJT/2011 CO NO. 47/RJT/2011 2 COURT, THE LD.DR VERY FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT NO INTE RIM ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT AND ONLY THE APPEAL IS PENDING AGAINST T HE QUANTUM ADDITION. 3. THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 27 1(1)(C) OF THE ACT. IT IS WELL SETTLED PRINCIPLES OF LAW THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE INDEPENDENT OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THOUGH PENALTY IS CONSEQUE NT TO THE ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS HAS TO BE ADJUDICATED SEPARATELY AND INDEPENDENTLY AFTER EXAMINING THE MA TERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THEREFORE, MERE PENDENCY OF AN APPEAL AGAINST THE Q UANTUM ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HIGH COURT CA NNOT BE A GROUND TO KEEP THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT PENDING. THE CIT(A), AFTER REFERRING TO THE JUDGME NT OF THE APEX COURT IN CIT VS RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS P LTD (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC ) FOUND THAT MERE MAKING A CLAIM WOULD NOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALING THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN THIS CASE , THE PENALTY HAS BEEN LEVIED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING A CLAIM AFTER FURNIS HING OF THE PARTICULARS. IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF RE LIANCE PETROPRODUCTS P LTD (SUPRA) THERE CANNOT BE ANY LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1)(C) OF THE ACT. EVEN OTHERWISE, IN THIS APPEAL, THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS T HAN RS.3 LAKHS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HOLD THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED T HE PENALTY. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. ACCOR DINGLY THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 4. THE CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED TO SUPPORT THE ORDE R OF THE CIT(A). THEREFORE, IT BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. ACCORDINGLY THE CROSS OBJE CTION IS ALSO DISMISSED. ITA NO. 298/RJT/2011 CO NO. 47/RJT/2011 3 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AN D THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THIS 22 ND DAY OF JULY, 2011. SD/- (N.R.S. GANESAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER RAJKOT, DT : 22 ND JULY, 2011 PK/- COPY TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. THE CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT-III, RAJKOT 5. THE DR, I.T.A.T., RAJKOT (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, RAJKOT