Artistic Stone Pvt.Ltd., Navsari V. The ACIT., Navsari Circle, Navsari

ITA 1029/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9820 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAMES KURIAN HEARIN G CONCLUDE

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 1029 /AHD/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 6 - 07 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND S S GODARA JM] ITA NO. 1029 /AHD/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 6 - 07 ARTISTIC STONE PRIVATE LIMITED, .... . . ........... APPELLANT C/O. MANOJ C PATEL, AT: BORICH, POST: ASHTAGAM, TAL. & DIST. NAVSARI 396 433. [A A CCA 3987 H ] VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI. . .... ..... .. ..... RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY SAKAR SHARMA FOR THE APPELLANT JAMES KURIAN FOR THE RESPONDENT HEARIN G CONCLUDED ON: 08.12. 20 16 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 14 .12.2016 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR , AM: BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL , THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2014 , PASSED BY THE LD . CIT(A), CONFIRMING PE NALTY U/S. 271(1)(D) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 6 - 07 . 2. GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AS FOLLOWS : THE LD. C IT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING PENALTY U/S.271(1)(D) AMOUNTING TO RS.10,08,430/ - . 3 . WHEN TH IS APPEAL W AS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, L EARNED COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2014 WHEREBY ISSUE OF ITA NO. 1029 /AHD/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 6 - 07 PAGE 2 OF 2 RELATED QUANTUM ADDITION WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED. IN T HIS VIEW OF THE MATTER , ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED C OUNSEL, PENALTY MUST STAND DELETED . 4 . L EARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT HAVE MUCH TO SAY BUT HE PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5 . IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ISSUE OF RE LATED QUANTUM ADDITION WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE , THE VERY BASIS OF THE IMPUGNED PENALTY CEA S E S TO HAVE ANY LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE BASIS. A CCORDINGLY , PENALT Y IMPOSED MUST BE DELETED TOO . WE, THEREFORE, DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTY. 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COUR T TODAY ON THE 14 TH DAY OF DECEMBER , 2016. SD/ - SD/ - S S GODARA PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: 14 TH DECEMBER, 2016 . COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD