RAJIV J MODI, MUMBAI V. ITO 19(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2365/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2443 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY
• Assessee Lawyers: DHIRENDRA M SHAH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2365/M/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 2008 ) SHRI RAJIV J. MODI, 702, PALM GROVE CHS LTD, 45, EAST AVENUE ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W), MUMBAI - 54. / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 19(2)(2), 3 RD FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, LALBAUG, MUMBAI - 12. ./ PAN : ACBPM6594N ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI DHIRENDRA M. SHAH / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AJAY, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 29 .06.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 .07 .2016 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 24.4.2015 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 34, MUMBAI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 2008. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS. 6,46,150/ - U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BRIEFLY NARRATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND FILED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE VIDE ITA NO.7754/M/2012 (AY 2007 - 2008), DATED 29.10.2014. BRINGING MY ATTENTION TO THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA), LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT VIDE THE SAID ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND REMANDED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR WANT OF A SPEAKING ORDER. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL AND THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS RELATABLE TO THE SAID QUANTUM APPEAL REMANDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, TH E PRESENT APPEAL MAY ALSO BE REMANDED WITH IDENTICAL DIRECTIONS. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA), I FIND THE QUANTUM APPEAL WAS REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) WITH 2 CERTAIN DIRECTIONS AND THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL, BEING THE PENALTY RELATABLE TO THE SAID QUANTUM APPEAL, SHOULD ALSO BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) WITH IDENTICAL DIRECTIONS. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY AND THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN QUANTUM APPEAL (SUPRA) VIDE PARA 4 OF ITS ORDER STAND FOR THIS APPEAL ALSO WITH MUTATIS MUTANDIS. THUS, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 2 N D JULY, 2016. (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 22.7 .2016 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI