ACIT 33(3), MUMBAI V. RUKMANI M IYER, MUMBAI

ITA 2353/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1765 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2353/M/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 ACIT -33(3), C-13, 408, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAVAN, BANDRA-KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI - 400051 VS. SMT. RUKMANI M. IYER, 1002, DOLL APARTMENT, BHATT LANE, KANDIVALI (W), MUMBAI 400 067 PAN: AAAPI 7916F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJEEV KASHYAP, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 30.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.12.2015 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.01.2015 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO A.Y.2008-09 WAS LISTED BY THE REGISTRY ALONG WITH BUNCH OF OTHER APPEALS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT WAS STATED TO BE LESS THAN RS.10 LAKHS AND, THUS, BEING COVERED BY THE CB DT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10/12/2015. HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT THE PRESEN T APPEAL IS RELATING TO THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.12,08,345/- UNDER SECTION 271 (1)(C) OF THE ACT. 2. THE REVENUE HAS COME IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHEREIN HE HAS HELD THAT SINCE THE ISSUE RELATING T O QUANTUM ADDITIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE AO), HENCE THE PENALTY LEVIED IN CONSEQUE NCE TO SUCH ADDITIONS AT THIS JUNCTURE CANNOT SUSTAIN. THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE , HAS SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ITA NO.2353/M/2015 SMT. RUKMANI M. IYER 2 PENALTY AND HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT DURING THE SE T ASIDE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE A O WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO REINITIATE THE PENALTY, IF THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANC ES SO MERIT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. D.R. IN THIS RESPECT. THE LD. D.R. HAS FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT SINCE THE QUANTUM ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO BY THE ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 07.01.14 PASSED IN ITA NO.3662/M/2012, HENCE, THE CONSEQUENT IAL PENALTY HAS NO LEGS TO STAND. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALREADY MADE IT CLEAR THAT IF IN THE FRESH ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON THE ISSUE, IF THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTA NCES SO MERIT, THE AO WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO REINITIATE THE FRESH PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.12.2015. SD/- SD/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 30.12.2015. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.