Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Hyderabad V. M/s Nayagara Technologies Limited, R.R.Dist

ITA 187/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3097 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C S PARTHA SARATHI
• Keywords: Onus to prove

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANSAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.187/HYD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 DCIT, CIRCLE 16 (1) HYDERABAD VS M/S NAYAGARA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., HYDERABAD (PAN AAACN 7992 F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI C.S. PARTHA SARATHI, DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER: CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)V, HYDERABAD DATED 19/11/20 09 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05.. 2. THE REVENUE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN CANCELLING THE PENALTY SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISCHARGE THE ONUS OF PRODUCING EV IDENCE IN SUPPORT OF EXPENSES/DEDUCTION CLAIMED IN SPITE OF AMPLE OPP ORTUNITIES AT VARIOUS LEVELS AND STAGES. 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN CANCELLING THE PENALTY AS IT IS CONTRADICTORY TO THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) IN DECI DING THE QUANTUM APPEAL WHERE IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISCHARGE THE ONUS TO PROVE THE LOSS/DEBIT IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. 3. IN SPITE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE, NONE AP PEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US, ON THE DATE OF HEARING . HENCE WE ITA NO.187/H/2010 M/S NAYAGRA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., HYDERABAD 2 PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE CASE AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITT ED THAT THE QUANTUM ISSUE WAS ALREADY SET ASIDE BY THE CIT(A) TO T HE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE THE ISSUE OF PENALTY MAY ALSO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 5. WE AGREED TO THE REQUEST OF THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE PENALTY MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO PASS FRESH PENALTY ORDERS AFTER DECID ING THE QUANTUM ISSUE BEFORE HIM. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT :14.7.2010 SD/- SD/- N.R.S. GANESAN CHANDRA POOJARI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 14 TH JULY, 2010. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S NAYAGARA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., LALGADI, MALAKPET, NEAR ALIABAD VILLAGE, RR DISTRICT. 2. DCIT, CIRCLE 16 (1), HYDERABAD 3. CIT(A)-V HYDERABAD. 4. CIT, HYDERABAD 5. THE D.R., ITAT, HYDERABAD. NP