IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE: SHRI D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT ME MBER I.T.A. NO.2531/AHD/2010 A. Y.1991-92 GAUTAM A. PARMAR PROP. RENCO ENGG. WORKS, 2, GHANSHYAM PARK, SATELLITE ROAD, AHMEDABAD PAN-AJUPP6745Q APPELLANT VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, C.U.-SHAH BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI Y.C. SURTI, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.C. PIPARA, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 30.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.07.2012 / ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XVI, AHMEDABAD DATED 04.06.2009 CONFIRMING THE PENALTY O F RS.12,77,200/- U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSES SEE, AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS THE HONBLE I TAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 31.01.2011 HAS RESTORED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. SINCE THE BASIS ON WHICH THIS PENALTY WAS IMPOSED IS NO LONGER I.T.A. NO.2531/AHD/2010 A. Y.1991-92 2 THERE, IT WAS ARGUED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PENALTY MAY KINDLY BE QUASHED. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE PENALTY U/S 271(1 )(C) OF THE ACT IS HEREBY SET ASIDE. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF THE A .O. IS SO SATISFIED AFTER PASSING A FRESH ORDER IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, H E MAY REINITIATE THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS. 3. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 30.07.2012 SD/- SD/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER TRUE COPY N.K. CHAUDHARY, SR. P.S. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD 6. THE GUARD FILE BY ORDER AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD