DCIT, Rohtak V. M/s. Jat Education Society, Rohtak

ITA 1550/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 91335 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 30-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 14-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAGAN SOOD
• Assessee Lawyers: GAUTAM JAIN
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO. - 1 550 /DEL/201 4 (ASSESSMENT YEAR - 200 6 - 0 7 ) DC IT, ROHTAK CIRCLE, ROHTAK (APPELLANT) VS JAT EDUCATION SOCIETY, DELHI ROAD, ROHTAK PAN - AA AJJ0176A (RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY SH.GAGAN SOOD, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY SH. GAUTAM JAIN, CA ORDER T HE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 07.01.2014 OF CIT(A), ROHTAK PERTAINING TO 200 6 - 0 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. C IT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACT S IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS.6,17,578/ - , WHICH WAS IMPOSED BY THE A.O. U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT AND THE APPEAL AGAINST THE QUANTUM ADDITION IS PENDING BEFORE THE HON BLE HIGH COURT. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES FOR PERMISSION TO ADD, DELETE OR AMEND THE GROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL . 2. THE LD. SR.DR RELYING UPON THE PENALTY ORDER SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AS THE ISSUE OF RELIEF GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS IS PENDING BEFORE THE HON BLE HIGH COURT. ACCORDINGLY BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ISSUE IS KEPT ALIVE. 3. THE LD. AR ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE THE POINT AT ISSUE IS FULLY COVERED IN ASSESSEE S FAVOUR. ADDRESSING THE FACTS IT WAS SUBMITTED THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED A NIL INCOME WHEREIN AS PER THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) BY THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT AT A FIGURE OF RS. 13,83,209/ - . THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE SAID DATE OF HEARING 30 .0 6 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17 .0 7 .2015 I.T.A .NO. - 1 550 / DEL/2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 ORDER BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO ENHANCED IT TO RS.20,28,227/ - . T HE SAID ISSUE WAS AGITATED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ITAT. INVITING ATTENTION TO THE OR DER DATED 19.07.2013 PASSED BY THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO. - 2542/DEL/2011 IT WAS SUBMITTED IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23)(IIIAB) OF THE ACT. IN VIEW THEREOF, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE CIT(A) HAS CONCLUDED THAT THERE IS NO TAXABLE INCOME WHICH REMAINS TO BE TAXED THE PENALTY OF RS.6,17,578/ - ACCORDINGLY WAS QUASHED. THESE FACTS IT WAS SUBMITTED HAVE BEEN TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF BY THE CIT(A) AND COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH RELIED UPON BY THE CIT(A) WAS FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM . IN THE AFORE - MENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT THE REVENUE S APPEAL DE SERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 4 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ON A CONSIDERATION THEREOF, WE FIND THAT IN THE FACE OF THE ABOVE - MENTIONED FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ON WHICH THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY THE FIND ING ARRIVED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER CANNOT BE FAULTED. INFACT, WE FIND THAT THE VIEW TAKEN IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN K.C.BUILDERS & OTHERS VS ACIT 265 ITR 562 (SC). THUS WHERE THE ADDITION ON FACTS DOES NOT SURVIVE THE OCCASIO N OF LEVY PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) DOES NOT ARISE. THE DEPARTMENTAL GROUND ACCORDINGLY FAIL S . 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 7 T H OF JULY , 2015. S D / - (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 7 /07 /2015 * AMIT KUMAR * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI