Shri Chaturbhai J. Patel, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer,Ward-2(1), Surat

ITA 1892/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9927 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NOS. 1889 TO 1893/AHD/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 TO 2007-08 CHATURBHAI J. PATEL, 26, SOLAPUR COMPOUND, NR. ADARSH CHEMICALS UDHNA, SURAT .. APPELLANT PAN : AHTPP 0572 G VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (1), SURAT .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE(S) BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSION REVENUE BY : SHRI DILEEP KUMAR , SR - DR / DATE OF HEARING 16/12/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01/01/2016 / O R D E R THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, SURAT, ALL DATED 11.05.2015 FOR A SSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 2007-08. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVES IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE SIMILAR, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO. 1889/AHD/2015 : AY 2003-04 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOW ING GROUNDS:- ((SMC) ITA NOS. 1889 TO1893/AHD/2015 CHATURBHAI J PAEL VS. ITO AYS: 2003-04 TO 2007-08 2 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN LEVYING PENALTY OF RS.1,76,690 /- U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT ABOVE PENALTY LEVIED BY ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. 3. APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR DELETE ANY GROUND(S) EITHER BEFORE OR IN THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY TH E LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PENALTIES IN QUES TION WERE LEVIED ON THE ADDITION MADE IN THE RESPECTIVE ASSES SMENT ORDERS MADE U/S 147 FOR THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITUR E. ALL THOSE ASSESSMENT ORDERS, I.E., FOR AYS 2003-04 TO 2 007-08, WERE QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 31.07. 2015 IN ITA NO.39 TO 43/AHD/2013, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED ON RE CORD. NOTHING CONTRARY WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE ON BE HALF OF THE REVENUE. SINCE THE ASSESSMENTS ITSELF HAVE BEEN QU ASHED, THE PENALTY BASED UPON SUCH ASSESSMENT CANNOT SURVIVE. THEREFORE, I DELETE THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, AMOUNTING TO RS.1,76,690/- IN ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2003-04. ((SMC) ITA NOS. 1889 TO1893/AHD/2015 CHATURBHAI J PAEL VS. ITO AYS: 2003-04 TO 2007-08 3 ITA NOS. 1890 TO 1893/AHD/2015 : AYS 2004-05 TO 200 7-08 4. SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE IN ABOVE FOUR APPEALS F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR AYS 2004-05 TO 2007-08. SINCE ALL T HESE ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN IT A NO.39- 43/AHD/2013 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE PENALTY BASED U PON SUCH ASSESSMENTS CANNOT SURVIVE. THEREFORE, I DELET E THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)( C) OF THE ACT, AMOUNTING TO RS.17,480/- IN AY 2004-05, RS.1,91,954 /- IN AY 2005-06, RS. 3,38,991/- IN AY 2006-07 AND RS.1,14,3 90/- IN AY 2007-08. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL FIVE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1ST JANUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 01/01/2016 BIJU T., PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! ' ' # / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ' # ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &'( ! , ' ! , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. (- . / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !', / ITAT, AHMEDABAD