ITA NO. 1825/DEL/2014 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO . 1 825 /DEL/20 1 4 A.Y : 2006 - 07 SHRI PRAKASH CHAND GOYAL, A-3/3A, GREEN APARTMENTS, PASHCIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI 63 (PAN: AHWPG2979B) VS ITO, WARD 14(3), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. V. RAJA KUMAR, ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SH. R.S. NEGI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 18-04-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 03-05-2016 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER PER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM H.S. SIDHU : JM H.S. SIDHU : JM H.S. SIDHU : JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPU GNED ORDER DATED 23/1/2014 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XVII, NEW DELHI FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ON T HE FOLLOWING GROUND:- THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ERRED IN HOLDING THE ASSESSEE GUILTY OF FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND IMP OSING PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. THE ACTION BEING ARBIT RARY, ERRONEOUS AND UNJUST MUST BE QUASHED WITH DIRECTIONS FOR APPROPRI ATE RELIEF. ITA NO. 1825/DEL/2014 2 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AR E NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEATED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSES SEE STATED THAT ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 26.05.2014 PASSED IN ITA NO. 5017/DEL/2 010 (AY 2006-07) IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AND RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH. THE FACTS AND FINDINGS NARRATED BY THE ITAT F BENCH, NEW DELHI IN ITS ORDER DATED 26.5.2014 P ASSED IN ITA NO. 5017/DEL/2010 (AY 2006-07) IN THE ASSESSEES CASE A RE GIVEN IN PARA 5 AT PAGE NO. 3 TO 4 OF THE ORDER. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVE NIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARAS ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER:- 5. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MA TERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT DOES NOT EMERGE AS TO WHAT IS THE EXACT ALLEGATION TO ASSESSS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. B ESIDES, LD. CIT(A) THOUGH HAS RAISED LIST OF OBJECTIONS AGAINST ASSESS EE BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED THAT THESE OBJECTIONS WERE NOT COMMUN ICATED TO ASSESSEE DURING HEARING OF FIRST APPEAL. IN THE GIV EN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT INTEREST OF J USTICE WILL BE SERVED IF THE ISSUE IS SET ASIDE, RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH KEEPING OUR OBSERVATIONS IN MIND, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND AFTER AFFORDING THE ASSES SEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 4. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE AFORESAID FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS THE ISSUE IN D ISPUTE HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THIS BENCH VIDE ORDER DATED 26.05.2014 FOR FRESH CO NSIDERATION, THEREFORE, THE PENALTY IN QUESTION CANNOT STAND IN THE EYES OF L AW. HENCE, THE PENALTY IN ITA NO. 1825/DEL/2014 3 DISPUTE STANDS DELETED. HOWEVER, THE AO IS AT LIB ERTY TO INITIATE THE FRESH PENALTY PROCEEDINGS, AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE AS SESSMENT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STAN DS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/05/2016. S SS SD DD D/ // /- -- - S SS SD DD D/ // /- -- - [ [[ [P PP PRASHANT MAHARISHI RASHANT MAHARISHI RASHANT MAHARISHI RASHANT MAHARISHI] ] ] ] [ [[ [H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU] ]] ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR DATE: 03/05/2016 COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES