Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax,central circle 2(1), Hyderabad V. Divi`s Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 247/Hyd/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8436 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 04-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 247/HYD/2020 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), HYDERABAD Vs M/s.Divi’s Laboratories Ltd. HYDERABAD [PAN: AAACD6745J] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Sunku Srinivas, DR For Assessee : NONE Date of Hearing : 08-09-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16-11-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal for AY.2016-17 arises from the CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad’s order dated 09-12-2019 passed in case No.10131 / 2019-20, involving proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Case called twice. None appeared for the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. We now advert to the Revenue’s sole substantive ground against the CIT(A)’s action deleting Section u/s.271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.61,32,255/- imposed in the Assessing Officer’s order dt.26-12-2018. ITA No. 247/Hyd/2020 :- 2 -: 3. It transpires during the course of hearing at the outset that the Assessing Officer’s corresponding penalty show cause notice dt.26-12-2018 nowhere specified as to whether the assessee had “concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income”. We quote Hon'ble jurisdictional high court’s decision Pr.CIT Vs. Baisetty Revathi [398 ITR 88] (Telangana & AP) and Mohd.Farhan A.Shaikh Vs. DCIT (2021) [125 taxmann.com 253] (Bom) (FB) that such a failure renders the entire penal mechanism as invalid. We therefore uphold the CIT(A)’s action deleting the impugned penalty on this precise legal issue alone. 4. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 16 th November, 2021 Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 16-11-2021 TNMM ITA No. 247/Hyd/2020 :- 3 -: Copy to : 1.Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad. 2.M/s.Divi’s Laboratories Ltd. 1-72-23(P)/DIVIS/303, Cyber Hills, Gachibowli, Hyderabad. 3.CIT(Appeals)-12, Hyderabad. 4.Pr.CIT-Central, Hyderabad. 5.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad. 6.Guard File.