Smt. Meera S.Desai, Baroda V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-2(3), Baroda

ITA 1828/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1307 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 04-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVIN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKITA BRAHMBHATT

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 1 828 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 7 - 08 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND KUL BHARAT JM] ITA NO. 1 828 / AHD / 2 0 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 7 - 08 MEERA S. DESAI ....... .. . ..... APPELLANT C/O. MILMET PHARMA LIMITED, 4 TH FLOOR, R. K. CENTRE, FATEHGUNJ MAIN ROAD, BARODA. [PAN AAMPD 493 5 H] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, .... .................. .... .. RESPONDENT WARD 2(3), BARODA. APPEARANCES BY: N IKITA BRAHMBHATT FOR THE APPELLANT PRAVIN KUMAR FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDI NG THE HEARING : AUGUST 4 TH , 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : OCTOBER 27 TH , 2015 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE LD . CIT (A) S ORDER DATED 9 TH MAY , 2012 UPHOLDING PEN ALTY OF RS.1,02,390/ - UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( THE ACT FOR SHORT), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08. 2. THE ISSUE IN APPEAL LIES IN A NARROW COMPASS OF FACTS. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF RS . 5,99,125/ - UNDER SECTION 57 OF THE ACT, BUT WHEN MA TT ER WAS ITA NO . 1 828 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 7 - 08 PAGE 2 OF 3 PROBED, THE ASSESSEE REVISED THE CLAIM TO RS.2,22,308/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT CONSIDERING THE REPAYMENT OF LOANS BORROW ED , THE ALLOWABLE DEDUCTION U/S. 57 WAS WORKED OUT AT RS.2,22,308/ - AS AGAINST ORIGINAL CLAIM OF RS.5,99,125/ - AND THAT IN THIS CONNECTION , THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED REVISED COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME AND AS AGAINST TOTAL LOSS OF RS.1,72,750/ - , THE INCOME IS REVISED TO RS.96,100/ - THE MATTER, HOWEVER, DID NOT REST THERE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO IMPOSED A PENALTY OF RS.1,02,390, BEING EQUIVALENT TO TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED, BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME WH ICH WOULD HAVE REMAINED UNDETECTED BUT FOR THE CASE BEING PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT ( A ) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED AND IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 4. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION WITHOUT LINKING EACH BORROWING TO THE AMOUNT A DVANCED BUT THEN DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THIS EXERCISE WAS CARRIED OUT A ND CLAIM, ACCORDINGLY, REDUCED. THE ASSESSEE S CLAIM THAT IT WAS A N INADVERTENT MISTAKE DE SE RVES TO BE ACCEPTED PARTICULARLY IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT IT WAS COMPLETELY TAX NEUTRAL AND EVEN AFTER REVISING THE CLAIM, IT W A S BELOW TAXABLE INCOME. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MAT T ER, WE UPHOLD THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTY. ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO . 1 828 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 7 - 08 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED. P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF OCTOBER , 2015. SD/ - SD/ - KUL BHARAT PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD , THE 27 TH DAY OF OCTOBER , 201 5 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD