M/s. Praful (Agarwal) Prints Pvt.Ltd., Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1(4), Surat

ITA 2094/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9195 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 23-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RASES SHAH
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.2094/AHD/2013 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2007-2008] M/S.PRAFUL (AGARWAL) PRINTS P.LTD. 1019, ROHIT A/C. MARKET RING ROAD, SURAT 395002. PAN : AACCP 3634 N VS ITO, WARD - 1(4) SURAT. *+ / (APPELLANT) ,- *+ / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RASES SHAH, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI MUDIT NAGPAL, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 23/02/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23/02/2017 .// O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.C IT(A)-I, SURAT ORDER OF LD.CIT(A)-III, AHMEDABAD DATED 24.6.2013 FOR THE ASSTT.YAR 2007-08. ITA NO.2094/AHD/2013 2 2. SOLE GRIEVANCE OF ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING PENALTY OF RS.12,78,820/- WHICH WAS IMPOSED BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION UPON WHICH PENALTY HAS BEEN IMPOSED UPON THE ASSESS EE, HAS SINCE BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.1567/AHD/2010 ORDER DATED 26.2.2014 THE IMPUGNED PENALTY IMPOSED BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD.CIT(A) DOES NOT SURV IVE, AND THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED. HE PLACED ON RECORD COPY O F THE TRIBUNALS ORDER. THE LD.DR HAS NOT CONTROVERT TO THIS SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, W E HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. WE FIND THAT PENALTY HAS BEEN I MPOSED QUA ADDITIONS ON TWO COUNTS, VIZ. (I) ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS CREDITORS OF RS.35,74,216 AND (II) ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF RS.2,25,000/-. THESE ADDITIONS WERE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), HOWEVER, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIR MED THE SAME. IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 27/2/2014 IN QUANTUM APPEAL, ITA NO.1567/AHD/2010 HAS DELETED BO TH ADDITIONS, AND THEREFORE, NO ADDITION EXISTS FOR IMPOSITION OF PEN ALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT SUB-CLAUSE (III) OF SECTI ON 271(1)(C) PROVIDES MECHANISM FOR QUANTIFICATION OF PENALTY. IT CONTEM PLATES THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE DIRECTED TO PAY A SUM IN ADDITION TO TAXES , IF ANY, PAYABLE HIM, WHICH SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN, BUT WHICH SHALL NOT E XCEED THREE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED BY REASON OF CONC EALMENT OF INCOME AND FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN OTHER WORDS, THE QUANTIFICATION OF THE PENALTY IS DEPENDED UPON THE ADDITION MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE BASIS FOR VISITING T HE ASSESSEE WITH PENALTY HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED BY DELETING THE ADDITION VIDE ABO VE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL ITA NO.2094/AHD/2013 3 DATED 26.02.2014 (SUPRA), THEREFORE, THERE CANNOT BE ANY PENALTY UPON THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, AND AC CORDINGLY, WE DELETE IMPUGNED PENALTY AND CANCEL ORDERS OF THE BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS, THUS, ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 RD FEBRUARY, 2017 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER