Multibase India Ltd., Nani Daman V. The ACIT.,Vapi Circle, Vapi

ITA 3070/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2303 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P K
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT , , BEFORE SHRI C.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . / ITA NO.3070/AHD/2014/SRT / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 MULTIBASE INDIA LTD., 74/5-6, DAMAN IND. ESTATE, VIL: KADAIYA, NANI DAMAN 396 210. [PAN: AAECS 4121K] VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI. ( / APPELLANT) ( !' /RESPONDENT) / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARDIK VORA, ADVOCATE /REVENUE BY : SHRI B.P.K. PANDA, SR. D.R /DATE OF HEARING : 10-04-2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-04-2018 / ORDER PER C.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), VALSAD (CIT( A) FOR SHORT) DATED 10.10.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2006-07 PAS SED IN THE FIRST APPEAL NO.CIT(A)/VLS/31/2012-13. 2. THE SOLE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS FOLLOWS: ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WE LL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HA S ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS. 12,67,876/- LEVIED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. 2 ITA NO.3070/AHD/2014/SRT (A.Y: 2006-07) MULTIBASE INDIA LTD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES AND CA REFULLY PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED ON THE RECORD OF THE TRIBU NAL. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR), IN FAIRNESS, SUBMITTED HIS CON CURRENCE TO THE SUBMISSION OF LD. ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE (AR) TH AT THE QUANTUM APPEAL FOR A.Y 2006-07 IN ITA NO.3211/AHD/2010/SRT HAS BEE N ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES RESTORING THE ISSUE TO THE FIL E OF ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) FOR EXAMINING THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESS EE AND HENCE, THE BASIS ON WHICH PENALTY WAS LEVIED IS NO MORE IN EXISTENCE . IN THIS SITUATION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT WHEN THE ADDITION ON WH ICH PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS LEVIED IS NOT IN EXISTENCE AND THE I SSUE IS PENDING BEFORE A.O FOR A FRESH ADJUDICATION THEN PENALTY IMPOSED BY TH E AO AND UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A) CANNOT BE HELD AS SUSTAINABLE AND THUS W E SET ASIDE THE SAME AND AO IS DIRECTED TO CANCEL THE PENALTY. 4. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FIND IT APPROPRIATE TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IF ON CONCLUSION OF REASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS ON THE ISSUE IF AO DEEM IT NECESSARY TO INITIATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U /S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT THEN, HE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY FOR DOING SO AS PER FA CTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE DURING THE ALL FOUR CORNERS OF THE PROVISI ONS OF THE ACT. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS AND LIBERTY TO THE AO APPEAL IS DISPOSED OFF. 3 ITA NO.3070/AHD/2014/SRT (A.Y: 2006-07) MULTIBASE INDIA LTD. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED ON TECHNICAL GR OUND WITHOUT ANY ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 1 3 TH APRIL, 2018. / SURAT ; DATED : 13 TH APRIL, 2018 EDN ! $ / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. # ( ) / THE CIT(A)- VALSAD ; 4. CCIT, SURAT; 5. , , / DR, ITAT, SURAT; 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // ) / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR , / ITAT, SURAT SD/- SD/- ( ) ( O.P.MEENA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (C.M.GARG) /JUDICIAL MEMBER