ACHIN AGARWAL, Jaipur V. DCIT, Alwar

ITA 118/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5497 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DR DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 118/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI ACHIN AGARWAL 5/2 PUNJABI BAGH EXTN. CLUB ROAD, DELHI CUKE VS. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- ALWAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AGSPA 3547 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSION JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT - DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 04/02/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 /02/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR DATED 20-01-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 RAISING THEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD AO U/S 271AAA R.W.S. 274 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 IS VOID AB INITIO AS THE FIRST APPEAL IS PENDING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 2. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF R S. 50,469/- U/S 271AAA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 118/JP/2014 SHRI ACHIN AGARWAL VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWA R . 2 2.1 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING EXCEPT SUBMITTING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION IN THE CAS E OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE LD. AR . CONSEQUENTLY UNDERSIGNED IS LEFT WITH NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS, EX PARTE QUA THE ASSES SEE, AFTER HEARING LD. DR AND AFTER PERUSAL OF WRITTEN SUBMISSION AND THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3.1 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS WRITTEN SUB MISSION HAS NOT PRESSED THE GROUND NO. 1. HENCE, THE SAME IS DISMIS SED BEING NOT PRESSED. 4.1 APROPOS GROUND NO. 2, I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR A ND GONE THROUGH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE BESIDES THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS OBSERVED THAT AN APPE AL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 864/JP/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 5-03-20 14 OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 3.2 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ENTIRE MATERIAL ON RECORD. BO TH THE PARTIES HAVE REITERATED THEIR EARLIER SUBMISSIONS, CONTENTI ONS AND ARGUMENTS MADE OR ADVANCED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN OTHER APPEALS OF THIS GROUP RELATING TO DIFFERENT P ERSONS LIKE SMT. GEETA AGARWAL AND SHRI PRADEEP AGARWAL WHERE SIMILA R ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON THE BASIS OF SIMILAR REASONINGS HAVE BEEN DELETED BY US VIDE SEPARATE ORDERS. THE FACTS IN RE ADDITION OF RS. 5,04,690/- ARE MUTATIS MUTANDIS IDENTICAL. WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE SURRENDER WAS NEVER MADE BY THIS ASSESSEE. THIS ASSESSEE NEVE R AGREED EITHER BEFORE HIM OR BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION WING WITH TH E SURRENDER IS ITA NO. 118/JP/2014 SHRI ACHIN AGARWAL VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWA R . 3 MADE BY HIS FATHER. HIS FATHER WAS NOT AUHORISED BY HIM TO MAKE ANY SUCH STATEMENT. NO INVESTIGATION IN THE CASE OF M/S. RAGHUVEER METAL INDUSTRIES WAS DONE. ACCORDINGLY, WITH THE SI MILAR REASONINGS AND DECISIONS, WHICH ARE REPEATED IN TH E WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THIS ASSESSEE, WE DELETE THE IMPUGNE D ADDITION AND ALLOW GROUND NO 2 OF THIS APPEAL. IT IS SEEN THAT WHEN THE QUANTUM ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 5,04,690/- HAS BEEN DELETED BY COORDINATE BENCH VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 5-03-2014 (SUPRA) THEN THERE IS NO QUESTION OF IMPOSING PENAL TY OF RS. 50,469/- IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE APPE AL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 50,469/- IMPOSE D BY THE LD. CIT(A). 3.0 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTL Y ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 / 02/ 2016 SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 11 /02/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI ACHIN AGARWAL, DELHI 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- ALWAR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 118/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR