M/s N.B. Industrial Area, New Delhi V. Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo

ITA 1433/CHANDI/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1414 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: A BENCH: CH ANDIGARH BEFORE HONBLE SHRI D K SRIVASTAVA, AM AND HONBLE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM ITA NO. 1433/CHANDI/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 N.B. INFOTECH V INCOME TAX OFFICER INDUSTRIAL AREA PARWANOO D-18/2, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE II NEW DELHI PAN: AADFN 0380 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI AMOL SINHA DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI NK SAINI ORDER D K SRIVASTAVA: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON 17.9.2008, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1 THE ORDER PASSED IS BAD IN LAW AND VOID AB-INITI O. 2 THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF INCOME-TAX A CT IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE EXTANT OF LAW. 3 THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-T AX ACT IS BAD IN LAW AS THE HON'BLE ITAT CHANDIGARH IN THE APPELLANT S CASE HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD . CIT(A), SHIMLA. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DEVELOPING OF SOFTWARE. IT FILED IT S RETURN OF INCOME RETURNING NIL INCOME AFTER CLAIMING RELIEF AMOUNTING TO RS. 31,47 ,337/- U/S 80IB. THE AO REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR RELIEF U/S 8 0IB, WHICH, ON APPEAL, WAS ALLOWED BY THIS TRIBUNAL BY ITS ORDER DATED 25.6.20 10 IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL BEARING ITA NO. 33 1/CHANDI/2006 . 3. IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER DATED 19.8.2010 PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNA L IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 CANCELING THE PENALTY L EVIED U/S 271(1)(C) ON IDENTICAL FACTS. THOUGH THE LEARNED. DR COULD NOT R EBUT THE SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ISSUE WAS COVERE D IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR IMMEDIATELY N.B. INFOTECH, NEW DELHI 1433/CHANDI/2010 2 2 PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR, HE HOWEVER SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE UNDER WHICH IMPUGNED PENALTY HAS BEEN LEVIED IN THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL ARE IDENTICAL WITH THOSE UNDER WHICH PENALTY WAS LEVIED IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR, I.E., 2002-03. THE LD. C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS RIGHT IS HIS SUBMISSIONS THAT THIS TRIBUNAL, VIDE I TS ORDER DATED 19.8.2010 IN ITA NO.1023/CHANDI/2009 (SUPRA), HAS CANCELLED THE PENA LTY ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID ORDER, THE IMPUGNED PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS CANCEL LED. APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 18 FEBRUARY 2011 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (D K SRIVASTAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R CHANDIGARH: THE 18 FEBRUARY, 2011 SURESH COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT, N.B. INFOTECH, NEW DELHI 2. THE RESPONDENT, ITO, PARWANOO 3. THE CIT(A), SHIMLA 4. THE LD. CIT, SHIMLA 4. THE D.R, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, CHANDIGARH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH