The ITO, Ward-4(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. International Housing Finance Corporation Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1947/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6739 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 05-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJIB JAIN SRDR
• Keywords: Initiation of penalty proceedings

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI D.K. TYAGI, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N.PHAUJA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1947/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 DATE OF HEARING:5.4.11 DRAFTED:11.4.11 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), ROOM NO.106, 1 ST FLOOR, NAVJEEVAN PRESS BUINDINGS, OFF ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-14 V/S. INTERNATIONAL HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., 318, PARAABADI, NR. MITHAKHALI RAILWAY STATION, ELLISBRIDGE, AHMEDABAD PAN NO.AACI9629Q (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI RAJIB JAIN, SR-DR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI SAKAR SHARMA, AR O R D E R PER D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS)-VIII, AHMEDABAD IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-V III/ITO/4(3)/33/08-09 DATED 27-02-2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE REVENUES HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING PENALTY OF RS.5,90,340/- LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.2 71(1)(C) OF THE ACT, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS THAT THE QUANTUM HAD NOT BEEN REACHED ITS FINALITY AS THE REVENUES APPEAL WAS PENDING BEFORE THE ITAT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A HOUSING FINANCE COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOM E DECLARED LOSS OF ITA NO. 1947/AHD/2009 A. Y. 2005-06 ITO WD-4(3) ABD V. INTERNATIONAL HOUSING F INANCE CORPN. LTD. PAGE 2 RS.14,27,996/- AND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S.143 (3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3,11,350/-. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT MADE FOLLOWING ADDITION IN THE RETUR N OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE:- I) INVESTMENT WRITTEN OFF R S.15 LAKH II) MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE (SUSPENSE) RS.1,13,276/- III) DISALLOWANCE U/S.40(A)(IA) OF RS.1, 85,772/-. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PREFER ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. THE AO SUBSEQUENTLY CARRIED T HE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AND LEVIED PENALTY IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS .15 LAKH AND MISCELLANEOUS AMOUNTING TO RS.1,13,276/-. IN APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) D ELETED THE PENALTY IMPOSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS.15 LAKH AND CONFIRMED THE PENALTY IN RESPECT OF MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURE AMOUNTING TO RS.1,13,276/-. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF LD. CIT(A ) NOW REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL FOR DELETION OF PENALTY IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.15 LAKH. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. SR-DR RELIED ON THE O RDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER LEVYING THE PENALTY WHILE LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.15 LAKH NO PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS INITIATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUCH INITIATION WAS ONLY DONE IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.1,13,276/-. IN REPLY LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT IN THE END OF ASSESS MENT ORDER THE AO HAS MENTIONED ISSUE NOTICE U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FO R FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME THIS AMOUNT TO INITIATING OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.271(1)(C) IN RESPECT OF ALL THE ADDITIONS MADE BY AO IN HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD AN D WE FIND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS CASE HAS MADE THREE DISAL LOWANCES/ADDITIONS BUT INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ONLY IN RESPECT OF AD DITION OF RS.1,13,276/- AS IS ITA NO. 1947/AHD/2009 A. Y. 2005-06 ITO WD-4(3) ABD V. INTERNATIONAL HOUSING F INANCE CORPN. LTD. PAGE 3 EVIDENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IN RESPECT OF OT HER ADDITIONS NO SUCH INITIATION WAS DONE. THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE SAID T HAT THE REMARK OF AO OF INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS IN THE END OF ASS ESSMENT ORDER WAS IN RESPECT OF OTHER TWO ADDITIONS ALSO. WE FURTHER FIND THAT D URING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN REPLY THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS W ERE INITIATED IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.1,13,276/- ONLY AND AO DID NOT CONTR OVERT THIS SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH MAKES IT CLEAR THAT PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS WERE NOT INITIATED IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.15 LAKH. SINCE THERE IS N O SUCH INITIATION IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.15 LAKH THE PENALTY IMPOSED BY AO WA S NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. THEREFORE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) DELETING T HIS PENALTY IS HEREBY UPHELD. THIS GROUND OF REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSE D. 6. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 06/05/2011 SD/- SD/- (A.N.PHAUJA) (D.K. TYAGI) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, DATED : 06/05/2011 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-VIII, AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD