M/s. Shiv Network, Surat V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-3, Surat

ITA 1079/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9376 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMIR VAKIL
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Section: 6

Judgement Text

ITA NO S . 1078 & 1079 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 6 - 07 & 2007 - 08 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND KUL BHARAT JM ] ITA NO S . 1078 & 1079 /AHD/ 20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 6 - 07 & 2007 - 08 SHIV NETWORK .. .APPELLANT 201 - 202, 2 ND FLOOR, RATN A SAGAR, VARACHHA ROAD, SURAT. [PAN: A AQFS 0172 B ] VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, .. . RESPONDENT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, SURAT. APPEARANCES BY: M.K. PATEL , FOR THE APPELLANT SAMIR VAKIL , FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 2 6 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 26 TH , 201 6 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR , AM : 1. BY WAY OF TH ESE APPEAL S , THE A SSESS EE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 6 TH MARCH, 2013 , PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE MAT T ER OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( THE ACT HEREINAFTER), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08. 2. WHEN THESE APPEALS WERE CALLED FOR HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED O UT THAT IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS THE RELAT ED ADDITIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN SET A SIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION . ITA NO S . 1078 & 1079 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 6 - 07 & 2007 - 08 PAGE 2 OF 2 LEANED COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT WHEN T HE RELATED QUANTUM ADDITIONS ITSELF DO NOT SURVI VE ANY LONGER , THE VERY FOUNDATION OF IMPUGNED PENALTY CEASES TO HOLD GOOD IN LAW. W E ARE THUS URGED TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTY. 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY ACCEPTS T HE FACTUAL POSITION STATED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE, HOWEVER, SUBMITS THAT IT SHOULD REMAIN OPEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO INITIATE FRESH PENALTY PROCEEDINGS IN CASE AS A RESULT OF THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS THE ADDITION IS REPEATED. 4. IN VI E W OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION S , WE DEE M IT FIT AND PROPER TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENA LTIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HOWEVER, IF NEEDED, INITIATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AS A RESULT OF FRESH ADJUDICATION IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS. WITH THIS OBSERVATION, APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL ARE ALLOWED . P RONO UNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 26 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 . SD / - SD/ - KUL BHARAT PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) PBN/* DATED: THE 26 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY , 201 6 . 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