The DCIT, Circle-1, Surat V. M/s. Jay Bharat Dyg. & Ptg. Mills Pvt.Ltd., Surat

ITA 248/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 60399 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

, , , , C, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, C BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'( #$ %&'(, , , , )* + ) )* + ) )* + ) )* + ) ' ' ' ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.248/AHD/2010 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2004-2005] DCIT, CIR.1 SURAT. /VS. M/S.JAY BHARAT DYG. & PRTG. MILLS PVT. LTD. P-216, KADODARA CHAR RASTA TA-PALSANA, DIST. SURAT. PAN : AAACJ 7428 C ( (( (-. -. -. -. / APPELLANT) ( (( (/0-. /0-. /0-. /0-. / RESPONDENT) + 1 2 )/ REVENUE BY : SHRI VINOD TANWANI 4& 1 2 )/ ASSESSEE BY : NONE 5 1 &(*/ DATE OF HEARING : 15 TH MAY, 2012 678 1 &(*/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1-06-2012 )9 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-2005 IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A)-I, SURAT DATED 16.11.2009. ITA NO.248/AHD/2010 -2- 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE WAS REJECTED BY THE BENCH. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF T HE REVENUE IS BEING DECIDED EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE-RESPONDENT ON MERIT AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR. 3. THE ONLY GROUND OF THE REVENUES APPEAL READS AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALT Y U/S.271(1)(C) OF RS.2,89,274/- OF THE ACT LEVIED BY THE AO. 4. THE LEARNED DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNE D DR AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A). WE FI ND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RECORDED IN PARA.2.3 OF HIS ORDER THAT I N RESPECT OF ADDITION OF WORK-IN-PROGRESS NO PENALTY CAN BE LEVIED IN THE VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF J.H. PARABIA TRANSPORT PVT. LTD., 284 ITR 361 AND THE FACTS OF T HE PRESENT CASE ARE SAME IN SO FAR AS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN T HE WORK-IN-PROGRESS SINCE INCEPTION AND THE ADDITION WAS ON ESTIMATE BA SIS AND THE CIT(A) DELETED THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THERE BEING NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDE R OF THE CIT(A) AND THE ISSUE BEING COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESS EE WITH THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE HOLD T HAT THERE IS NO ITA NO.248/AHD/2010 -3- MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WHICH IS CONFIRM ED AND THE GROUND OF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( %&'( %&'( %&'( %&'( / ANIL CHATURVEDI) )* + )* + )* + )* + /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD