Jagjit Singh, Punjab V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1124/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4320 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS AASHNA PAUL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c); 13; 153C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1124, 1125, 1126 & 1127/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012- 13 JAGJIT SINGH, C-488, PHASE-I, VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CI RCLE-16, URBAN ESTATE, FOCAL POINT, NEW DELHI. JAMALPUR, CHANDIGARH ROAD, LUDHIANA. PAN : AFTPS0204A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. SATISH AGGARWAL, CA RESPONDENT BY: MRS. AASHNA PAUL, CIT/DR DATE OF HEARING: 09.02.2021 DATE OF ORDER : 09.02.2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS DATED 15 TH DECEMBER, 2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXVI, NEW DELHI (LD. CIT(A)), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 TO 2012- 13, JAGJIT SINGH (THE ASSESSEE) FILED THESE APPEALS CHALLENGING THE SUST ENANCE OF PENALTIES OF RS.22,69,605/-, RS.15,51,350/-, RS.5,51,47,230/- AN D RS.1,43,73,650/- IMPOSED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE PENALTIES IMPOSED IN THE INSTANT CASES ARE BASED ON THE ADDIT IONS MADE VIDE ORDERS 2 PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 153C OF THE ACT. I T IS SUBMITTED THAT SUCH ORDERS PASSED U/S. 153C OF THE ACT STAND QUASHED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASES FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION IN ITA NOS.1095, 1096, 1097 & 1098/DE L/2015 VIDE ORDER DATED 01.10.2019. IT IS, THEREFORE, CONTENDED THAT ONCE THE VERY BASIS FOR IMPOSING IMPUGNED PENALTIES STANDS COLLAPSED, THERE REMAINS NO JUSTIFICATION TO SUSTAIN THE PENALTIES IN THE PRESE NT CASES. 3. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, THOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE CONTENTION S MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD IN THE LIGHT OF SUBMISSIONS MADE ON EITHER SIDE. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE IMPUG NED PENALTIES ARE BASED ON THE ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE ORDERS U/S. 153C OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO AN ADMITTED FACT THAT SUCH ORDERS U/S. 153C HAVE BEEN QUASHED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASES OF A SSESSEE ITSELF (SUPRA) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. HENCE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT ONCE THE VERY BASIS OF IMPO SING IMPUGNED PENALTIES STANDS COLLAPSED, WE FIND NO JUSTIFICATIO N TO SUSTAIN THE PENALTIES, AS DONE BY THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNE D ORDERS ARE LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE AND THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES ARE DIRECTED T O BE DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON CONCLUSION OF VIRTUAL HEARING IN PRESENCE OF PARTIES ON 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (O.P. KANT) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 09/02/2021 AKS