Asst. CIT, Circle-2, Pune V. M/s. Prasad Constructions, Pune

ITA 1486/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 84850 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1486/PN/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PUNE .. APPELLANT VS. M/S. PRASAD CONSTRUCTIONS, YASHSHREE, KARADNAGAR, VADGAON SHERI, PUNE 411 014 .. RESPONDENT PAN NO. AADFP3960D ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJESH DAMOR DATE OF HEARING : 13-08-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19-08-2014 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 14-02-2013 OF THE CIT(A)-II, PUNE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. DELETION OF PENALTY OF RS.10,38,562/- LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT IS THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE VARIOUS GROUNDS. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A FIRM ENGAGED IN THE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 31-10-2006 DECLARING NIL INCOME AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION OF RS .30,85,450/- U.S.80IB(10) OF THE I.T. ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R REJECTED THE CLAIM 2 OF DEDUCTION U/S.80IB(10) ON THE GROUND THAT THE AS SESSEE DOES NOT FULFIL THE CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED U/S.80IB(10) AND DETERMIN ED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.30,85,450/-. THEREAFTER, HE LEVIED PENALTY U /S.271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.10,38,562/-. IN APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) CANCELLED THE PENALTY SO LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON T HE GROUND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BY D IRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.80IB(10 ). 3.1 AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE REV ENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET F ILED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITA NOS. 1490 & 1491/PN/ 2009 AND ITA NO.684/PN/2010 ORDER DATED 31-10-2012 FOR A.YRS. 20 05-06 TO 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. REFERRING TO THE SAID DECISION HE SU BMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.80I B(10). THEREFORE, THE VERY BASIS ON WHICH THE PENALTY WAS LEVIED DOES NOT SURVIVE. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY SUPPORTED TH E ABOVE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. SINCE THE VERY BASIS OF LEVY OF PENALTY DOES NOT SURVIVE DUE TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTI ON U/S.80IB(10) AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL BROUGHT TO OUR NOT ICE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) CANCELLING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. WE ACCORDINGLY UPHOLD THE ORDE R OF THE CIT(A). THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE ACCORDINGLY D ISMISSED. 3 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19-08-2014. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED: 19 TH AUGUST, 2014 SATISH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A)-II, PUNE 4. THE CIT-II, PUNE 5. THE D.R, A PUNE BENCH 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE