Shri Parin Rajnikant Maniar, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-11(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1363/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 50850 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ASUTOSH P NANA VATY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND A. K. GARODIA , AM) ITA NO.1363/AHD/2011 A. Y.: 2006-07 SHRI PARIN RAJNIKANT MANIAR, C/O. NANAVATY & ASSOCIATES, A/18, 3 RD FLOOR, NARAYAN CHAMBERS, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD 380 009 VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 11(2), AHMEDABAD PA NO. AHKPM 1433 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI ASUTOSH P. NANAVATY, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 04-11-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04-11-2011 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-XV I, AHMEDABAD DATED 07-02-2011, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, CHAL LENGING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE IT ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL CHALLENGED T HE LEVY OF PENALTY FOR LOW WITHDRAWAL OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OF RS.60,000/-.THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A ) FOR DISPOSAL AND AS SUCH THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). THE LEARNED DR ALSO SUGGESTED THAT SINCE TH E QUANTUM APPEAL IS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR THE SAME ITA NO.1363/AHD/2011 SHRI PARIN RAJNIKANT MANIAR VS ITO WARD - 11(2), AH MEDABAD 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE SAME MATTER IN ISSUE, THEREF ORE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DECIDED THE PENALTY APPEAL AFTER DECISION TAKEN IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL, THEREFORE, THE MATTER MAY BE RE STORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 3. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). BOTH THE PARTIES STATED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE ON QUANTUM ON THE SAME MATTER IN ISSUE OF LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDR AWAL IS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). THEREFORE, THE LEARNED C IT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL BEFORE DECIDING THE QUANTUM APPEAL, BECAUSE THE QUANTUM ORDER WOULD HAVE BEARING ON LEV Y OF THE PENALTY. WE ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF TH E LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMING LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1) (C ) OF THE IT ACT ON THE ABOVE MATTER IN ISSUE AND RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO HIS FILE WITH DIRECTION TO RE- DECIDE THE PENALTY APPEAL AFTER DECIDING THE QUANTU M APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHALL GIVE REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT/- ITA NO.1363/AHD/2011 SHRI PARIN RAJNIKANT MANIAR VS ITO WARD - 11(2), AH MEDABAD 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD