B.R. Jaitely, Lucknow V. ITO, Lucknow

ITA 130/LKW/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 75123 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K RAM
• Assessee Lawyers: M P MISHRASHAILENDRA MISHRA S
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 130/LKW/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001 - 02 B.R. JAITELY A - 411, INDIRA NAGAR LUCKNOW V. ITO , RANGE 1(4) LUCKNOW PAN: ADNPJ4207G (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: S/SHRI. M. P. MISHRA/SHAILENDRA MISHRA, ADVOCATES RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. R. K. RAM, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 06.01.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10.01.2014 O R D E R PER SU NIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF T HE APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.10 OF 2013 WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ADDITIONS IN QUANTUM WERE SET ASIDE BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT AND THE MATTER WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE - ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE S AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ADDITIONS : - 2 - : IN QUANTUM HAVE BEEN SET ASIDE AND THE M ATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE - ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH, PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. 3 . THE LD. D.R. DID NOT DISPUTE THE FACT. 4 . THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE JURI SDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DATED 6.9.2013 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.10 OF 2013 IS PLACED ON RECORD AND FROM ITS PERUSAL WE FIND THAT THE ADDITIONS ON QUANTUM HAVE BEEN SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE LIGHT OF THE SE FACTS, THE PENALTY ORDER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PASS A FRESH ORDER CONSEQUENT TO THE DECISION TAKEN IN THE QUANTUM WHILE FRAMING ASSES SMENT PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.1.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 10.1.2014 JJ: 0601 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR : - 3 - : ASSISTANT REGISTRAR