Hotel Oasis (Surat) Pvt. Ltd., Surat V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-1, Surat

ITA 2130/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 80534 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-10-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DINESH SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH MALPANI

Judgement Text

, , , , B, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, B BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ #$ #$ #$ # ## #. .. .# ## #. . . . % % % %, , , , &' ( & ' &' ( & ' &' ( & ' &' ( & ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.2130/AHD/2011 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2006-2007] HOTEL OASIS (SURAT) P. LTD. NR. VAISHALI CINEMA VARACHHA ROAD, SURAT 395 006. PAN : AAACH 5864 Q /VS. DCIT, CIR.1 SURAT. ( (( ( *+ *+ *+ *+ / APPELLANT) ( (( ( ,-*+ ,-*+ ,-*+ ,-*+ / RESPONDENT) ./ 0 1 & / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAMESH MALPANI ( 0 1 & / REVENUE BY : SHRI DINESH SINGH, SR.DR 3 0 /4' / DATE OF HEARING : 16 TH OCTOBER, 2014 567 0 /4' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25-11-2014 &8 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS IS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2006-07 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 2. THE ONLY GROUND OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW, CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING LEVY OF PENALTY OF R S.10,86,537/- U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT IN QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT ASSTT.YEAR 2006-07 IN ITA NO.2339/AHD/2009 DTD. ITA NO.2130/AHD/2011 -2- 16.12.2011, THE TRIBUNAL HAS DELETED THE ADDITION M ADE, AND THEREFORE, THERE REMAINS NO BASIS FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY UNDER SE CTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A) AND ALSO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL D ATED 16.12.2011 (SUPRA) IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT I N THE QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSEESSE, THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 16.12.2011 (SUPRA) HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSES SEE, AND THEREFORE, THERE REMAINS NO BASIS FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY UNDER SE CTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOLD THAT THE PENALTY IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) HAS NO BASIS, AND IS CANCELLED AND THE GROUND OF THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( # ## # . .. . # ## # . . . . % % % % /N.S.SAINI) &' ( &' ( &' ( &' ( /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD