M/s. Balaji Industries, Morbi V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(4), Morbi

ITA 121/RJT/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 12124914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AVINASH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: J C RANPURA
• Section: 271(1)(c); 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH SMC, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI A.L. GEHLOT (AM) I.T.A. NO.121/RJT/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS 1997-98) M/S BALAJI INDUSTRIES VS ITO, WARD-5(4) RAFALESHWAR RAJKOT MORBI-WANKANER HIGHWAY MORBI PAN : AAACFB0506A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI JC RANPURA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AVINASH KUMAR O R D E R THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF CIT(A)-IV, RAJKOT DATED 10-02-2010 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98. THE GROUND RAISED IS RELATED TO LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.47,700 U /S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY U/S 271(1)( C) OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS OF ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTING ASSESSEES BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BEE N CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). 3. THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE QUANTUM ON WHICH TH E ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY HAS BEEN SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE ITAT IN ITA NO.1567/RJT/2005 ORDER DATED 17-01-2006. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN COMPLIANCE TO THE DIRECTION OF THE ITAT, THE ASSESS ING OFFICER MADE FRESH ASSESSMENT WHICH HAS BEEN CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSE E BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 31-12-2010 HAS QUASHED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER HOLDING THAT INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 WAS BAD IN LAW. THE LD.DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE REV ENUE AUTHORITIES. ITA NO.121/RJT/2011 2 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PERU SED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THAT THE BASIS ON WHIC H THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED THE PENALTY DOES NOT SURVIVE. THEREFORE, QUESTION OF L EVY OF PENALTY DOES NOT ARISE. THE IMPUGNED PENALTY IS HEREBY CANCELLED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20-05-2011. SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RAJKOT, DT : 20 TH MAY, 2011 PK/- COPY TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. THE CIT(A)-IV, RAJKOT 4. THE CIT-III, RAJKOT 5. THE DR, I.T.A.T., RAJKOT (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, RAJKOT