JAFKAY P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 4(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2835/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3596 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 13-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILENDRA P YADAV
• Section: 143(3); 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'J' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D,MANMOHAN (VP) & SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA(AM) I.T.A. NO. 2835/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004 - 05) M/S. JAFKAY PVT. LTD. VS. ITO 4(2)(3) 212/A, HIND SAURASHTRA AAYAKAR BHAVAN INDU STRIAL ESTATE M.K. ROAD 85 - 86, M.V. ROAD, MAROL MUMBAI - 400 020. ANDHERI EAST MUMBAI - 400 059. PAN/GIR NO. AABCJ0293Q (APPELLANT) I .. I (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MS. VASANTI PATEL DEPARTMENT BY SHRI AKHILENDRA P. YADAV DATE OF HEARING : 13.5.20 15 D ATE OF PRON OUNCEMENT : 20 .5.2015 ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN (VP): - THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - 8, MUMBAI AND IT PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2004 - 05. 2. PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 271(1)(C) O F THE ACT HAVING BEEN CONFIRMED BY LEARNED CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED CONSEQUENT TO THE DE TERMINATION OF TOTAL INCOME IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WHEREAS, THE SAID ORDER WAS SET ASIDE BY THE ITAT VIDE ORDER NO. 3841/MUM/2010 DATED 14.12.2012 FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AND CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER WAS ALSO PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 2.5.2014. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON 25.3.2011 WHEREAS LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE ORDER DATED 30.1.2012 BUT IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DATED 14.12.2012 THE MATTER DESERVES TO BE RECONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SINCE THE TAX AUTHORITIES HAD NO BENEFIT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT AND THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY IT. AT ANY RATE, SINCE THE QUANTUM PROCEEDING S, WHICH WERE THE BASIS FOR LEVY OF PENALTY , ARE SET ASIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ALSO DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJ ECTION I N THIS REGARD . T HOUGH, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS A PORTION OF ADDITION WAS SUSTAINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. HAVING REGARD TO THE ORDER PASSE D BY THE ITAT DATED 14.12.20 12 WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO HIM TO RECONSIDER THE MATTER IN THE LIGHT OF THE FRESH ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NEEDLESS TO OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO RAISE ITS CONTENTION WITH REGARD TO BONAFIDES OF ITS CLAIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. ORD ER HAS BEEN PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 .5.2015. SD/ - SD/ - (N.K.BILLAIYA) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI; DATED ) 20 /5/2015 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT I THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY. /ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI PS