Shri Chandravadan Sakarlal Lakadia, Surat V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-2, Surat

ITA 2279/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0988 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, B IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO.2279/AHD/2013 [ASSTT.YEAR 2007-2008] CHANDRAVADAN S. LAKADIA A-71, ASHIRWAD RESIDENCY BESIDE CHINA GATE-2 NEW CITY LIGHT AREA ALTHAN, SURAT 395 007. PAN : AAFPL 5312 H VS DCIT, CIR.2 SURAT. &' / (APPELLANT) )* &' / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS REVENUE BY : SHRI JAMESH KURIAN, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 25/07/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01/08/2016 +,/ O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-II, SURAT DATED 10.7.2013 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2007-08. 2. SOLITARY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE L D.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY AMOUNTING TO RS.11,31,540/- IMPOSED BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ITA.NO.2279/AHD/2013 2 3. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING, THE LD.COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION, AND PLACED ON RECORD COPY OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO.3407/AHD/2010 FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR 2007-08. IT IS PLEADED IN THE SUBMISSION THAT TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASI DE THE ISSUE REGARDING THE ADDITION TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE F ILE OF THE AO FOR RE- ADJUDICATION. THEREFORE, ISSUE REGARDING IMPOSITIO N OF PENALTY DESERVES TO BE SET-SIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. THE LD.DR WA S UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.DR, WE HAVE GONE T HROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUN AL. WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ISSUES WITH REGARD TO THE DETERMINATION OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD.A O FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. SUB-CLAUSE (III) OF SECTION 271(1)(C) PROVIDES MECH ANISM FOR QUANTIFICATION OF PENALTY. IT CONTEMPLATES THAT TH E 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 EXCEED THREE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED BY REASON OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AND FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN OTHER WORDS, THE QUANTIFICATION OF THE PENALTY IS DEPENDED UPON THE ADDITIONS MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. UPTO AND UNTIL, THE ISSUE REGARDING DETERMINATION OF THE TAXABLE INCOME IS FINALIZED, P ENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT CANNOT BE IMPOSED UPON THE ASS ESSEE. THE DETERMINATION OF TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS SUBJUDICED BEFORE THE LD.AO. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RESTORE ALL THESE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE A O SHALL DECIDE THE ISSUE REGARDING IMPOSITION OF PENALTY AFTER PASSING OF TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER, AS ITA.NO.2279/AHD/2013 3 PER TRIBUNALS DIRECTION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 ST AUGUST, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 01/08/2016