Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax,-TDS, Baroda V. Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited., Baroda

ITA 2642/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8688 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 23-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

ITA NO S .2641 , 2642 & 2643 /AHD/2014 A YS: 2008 - 09 , 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD SM C BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR , A CCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ITA NO S . 2641 , 2642 & 2643/AHD/2014 A.Y S . 2008 - 09 , 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) , BARODA. ... .. APPELLANT VS. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED , .RESPONDENT 2 ND FLOOR, ABC TOWER, OLD PADRA ROAD, BARODA. [PAN : AAACG 6725 H] APPEARANCES BY : PRASOON KABRA, FOR THE APPELLANT PARIN SHAH, FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 05.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 28.0 8 .2017 O R D E R 1. THESE THREE APPEALS PERTAIN TO THE S A ME ASSESSEE, INVOLVE A C O MMON ISSUE AND WERE HEARD TOGETH ER. AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE , THEREFORE, ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. THE COMMON GRIEVANCES, BARING THE QUANTUM OF PENALTIES, IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE AS FOLLOWS : - 1. THE L EARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DELETING THE PENALTY U/S.271C OF THE I.T. ACT OF RS.36,29,467/ - (IN A.Y. 2008 - 09) (RS.42,60,598/ - IN A.Y. 2009 - 10 & RS.43,83,405/ - IN A.Y. 2010 - 11) LEVIED BY THE ADDL. CIT, BARODA , H OLDING THAT THE QUANTUM ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE HON BLE ITAT. 2. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN IGNORING THAT THE HON BLE GUJARAT H IGH C OURT HAS ADMITTED THE DEPARTMENT S APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF ITAT FOR DELETING THE QUANTUM . ITA NO S .2641 , 2642 & 2643 /AHD/2014 A YS: 2008 - 09 , 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 3. ON THE FACT S AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER ANY GROUND OR ADD A NEW GROUND, WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY . 5. IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) MAY BE CANCELLED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY KINDLY BE RESTORED . 3. AS EVIDENT FROM THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE RELATED TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE DEMAND UNDER SECTION 201 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 STANDS DELETED AS ON NOW. THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL BINDS US AS WELL , AND MERELY BECAUSE HON BLE HIGH COURT HAS ADMITTED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER DOES NO T DILUTE IT S BINDING CHARACTER. 4. AS THE RELATED TDS DEMANDS UNDER SECTION 201 STAND DELETED, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL BASIS FOR THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES. THE LEARNED CIT(A) W A S THUS QUITE JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES AS WELL. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT DISPUTE THIS POSITION. I, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), AND DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE MATTER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 28 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: AHMEDABAD, THE 28 TH DAY OF AUGUST , 2017. PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLANT TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD