The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar V. M/s Prehari Protection System Pvt. Ltd, Kapurthala

ITA 183/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9661 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO.183(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 DY. CIT, CIRCLE-IV, JALANDHAR. VS. M/S. PREHARI PROTECTION SYSTEM PVT. LTD. JALLOW KHANNA CHOWK, KAPURTHALA. PAN:AAACP8094N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 13.06.2016 DATE OF PRONO UNCEMENT: 01.08.2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LEARNED CIT(A), JALANDHAR, DATED 19.01.2016, FOR ASST. YEAR :2011-12. 2. NO BODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NO R ANY BODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, HOWEVER, GOING TH OROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD, WE WERE OF THE OPINION THAT THE M ATTER CAN BE DISPOSED OF EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF BOTH PARTIES, THEREFORE, THE CASE WAS TREATED AS HEARD. 3. FROM THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD THE BRIEF FAC TS ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED CERTAIN EXPENSES OUT O F FOREIGN TRAVELING EXPENSES CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, HE IMPO SED THE PENALTY U/S 271(1) (C) FOR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME . HOWEVER, THE LEARNED ITA NO.183 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEA R: 2011-12 2 CIT(A) DELETED THE PENALTY HOLDING THAT IF SOME BON AFIDE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DENIED BY ASSESSING OFFICER THEN IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME . HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT ADDITION WAS MADE ONLY ON ESTIMATED BASIS, THE REFORE, HE DELETED THE PENALTY. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), WHO HAS RELIED UPON A NUMBER OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS INCLUDING THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V S. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS LTD. REPORTED IN 322 ITR 158 (SC). THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THIS CASE HELD AS UNDER: MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THE EXPEND ITURE, WHICH CLAIM WAS NOT ACCEPTED OR WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE REVENUE, THAT BY ITSELF WOULD NOT, IN OUR OPINION, ATTRACT THE PE NALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C ). IF WE ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE REV ENUE THEN IN CASE OF EVERY RETURN WHERE THE CLAIM MADE IS NOT ACCEPTED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ANY REASON, THE ASSESSEE WILL INVITE PE NALTY BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ANY REASON, THE ASSESSEE WILL INVITE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C). THAT IS CLEARLY NOT THE I NTENDMENT OF THE LEGISLATURE. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISION WE DO NO T FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE RE VENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01 .08.2016. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCO UNTANT MEMBER DATED: 01.08.2016. /PK/ PS. ITA NO.183 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEA R: 2011-12 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER