Shyam Karthik, Coimbatore V. ACIT Central Circle 2, Coimbatore

ITA 2292/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4973 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 02-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TO
• Assessee Lawyers: B RAMAKRISHNAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Set aside
• Section: 192

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , D B ENCH, CHENNAI, CAMP AT COIMBATORE ... , ! '#, $ #% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./I.T.A.NOS.2288, 2289 & 2290/CHNY/2018 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2011-12, 2012-2013 & 2014-15) SHRI. P. PADMANABAN, NO.6-19A. J V AVENUE, THIRUMURUGAN NAGAR, VEERIYAMPALAYAM ROAD, KALAPATTI, COIMBATORE 641 048. VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,-2, COIMBATORE PAN: AHZPP 8229N] ./I.T.A.NOS.2292, 2293, 2294 & 2295/CHNY/2018 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS:2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-2014 &2014-15) SHRI. SHYAM KARTHIK, NO.6-19A. J V AVENUE, THIRUMURUGAN NAGAR, VEERIYAMPALAYAM ROAD, KALAPATTI, COIMBATORE 641 048. VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,-2, COIMBATORE PAN: CGEPS 9381J ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI B. RAMAKRISHNAN, C.A. /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PAVITRAN KUMAR, JCIT 2 I.T.A. NOS.2288 TO 90 &92 TO 95-18 /DATE OF HEARING : 06.02.2020 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.02.2020 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY TWO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES DIRECTED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 18, COIMBATORE, CONFIRMING LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271 (1) (C) / 271AAB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). SINCE C OMMON ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IN ALL THE APPEALS, WE HEARD THE SAME TOGETHER AND DISPOSING OFF THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 192 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEA LS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSES HAVE FILED PETITIONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. HAVING HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSE E AND THE LD.DR, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE ON T HE PART OF THE ASSESSEES FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE STIPULATED TI ME. THEREFORE, THE DELAY OF 192 DAYS IS CONDONED AND THE APPEALS ARE ADMITTED. 3. COMING TO THE MERIT OF THE APPEALS, SHRI. B. R AMAKRISHNAN, LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THER E WAS SEARCH ON 05.09.2013 AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN ALL THE APPEALS BY THE 3 I.T.A. NOS.2288 TO 90 &92 TO 95-18 ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.271(1) (C) OF THE ACT IN ALL THE AP PEALS EXCEPT IN ITA NO.2290/CHNY/2018 PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WAS INITIATE D U/S. 271AAB OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY ACCORDING LY. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEES BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO WAS CONFIRMED. IN THE MEANTIME, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (IN SHORT THE PCIT) SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN ALL THE APPEALS AND DIRECTED THE AO TO MAKE ASSESSMENT DENOVO. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE WHEN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE THER E CANNOT BE ANY PENALTY. THEREFORE, THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO AS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT (A) HAS NO INDEPENDENT LEGS TO STAND. THE LD. REP RESENTATIVE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORDER OF THE PCIT U/S.263 OF THE ACT, THE AO HAS ALSO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS A ND INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE THE PRESENT PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS CANNOT STAND IN THE EYE OF LAW. 4. WE HEARD SHRI. PAVITRAN KUMAR, THE LD. DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSID ERED OPINION THAT VERY BASIS FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271 (1) ( C) AND 271A AB OF THE ACT IS ASSESSMENT ORDER. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER WAS SET ASIDE BY THE PCIT U/S.263 OF THE ACT WITH A FURTHER DIRECTION TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT, HENCE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS NOT IN EXISTENCES. THEREFORE, THE PENALTY 4 I.T.A. NOS.2288 TO 90 &92 TO 95-18 LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSEQUENT TO THE NON EXISTANT ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT STAND IN THE EYES OF LAW. ACCORDINGL Y, THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES BELOW IN ALL THE APPEALS ARE SET ASIDE AND THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO ARE DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE SHRI. P. PADMANABAN, IN ITA NOS. 2288, 2289 AND 2290/CHNY/20 18 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12, 2012-2013 & 2014-15 AND THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SHRI. SHYAM KARTHIK, IN ITA NOS.2292, 2293 , 2294 AND 2295/CHNY/2018 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12, 2012-1 3, 2013- 2014 & 2014-15 ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 6TH FEBRUARY, 2020 AT CAMP AT COIMBATORE. SD/- SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (... ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER COIMBATORE. /DATED, THE 6 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. KV #$ %&'& /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. * ( )/CIT(A) 4. * /CIT 5. &+, - /DR 6. ,./ /GF