ITO, SRIGANGANAGAR V. M/s. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, PADAMPUR

ITA 322/JODH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3106 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R KOKANI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH GUPTA
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 260A

Judgement Text

[1] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.322/JODH/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMI TI, WARD-2, DHAN MANDI, SRIGANGANAGAR. PADAMPUR. PAN:AABTK0296R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.323/JODH/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMI TI, WARD-2, DHAN MANDI, SRIGANGANAGAR. GAJSINGHPUR. PAN:AABTK0293L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.324/JODH/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMI TI, WARD-2, DHAN MANDI, SRIGANGANAGAR. SRIGANGANAGAR. PAN:AABTK0300Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.325/JODH/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMI TI, WARD-2, DHAN MANDI, SRIGANGANAGAR. RAISINGHNAGAR. PAN:AABTK0298B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) [2] APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. R. KOKANI, D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAKESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING : 15/07/2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15/07/2013 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE FOUR APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS EACH DATED 28/02/2013 OF CIT(A), BI KANER. IN ALL THESE APPEALS COMMON ISSUE IS INVOLVED HAVING IDENTICAL F ACTS AND THE APPEAL WERE HEARD TOGETHER SO THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. FIRSTLY, WE WILL DEAL WITH I.T.A. NO.322/JODH/20 13. IN THIS APPEAL THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT READS AS U NDER: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY OF R.96,61 ,700/- IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE ITAT, EVEN THE DEPARTMENT HAS F ILED APPEAL U/S 260A BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT AGAIN ST THE SAID ORDER. 3. IN OTHER APPEAL IDENTICAL GROUND IS RAISED. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN FIGURE OF THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) WHICH HAS BEEN DELETED BY LEARNED CIT(A). 4. THE FACTS RELATED TO THIS CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE TH AT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 22/03/2008 AND REVISED RETU RN ON 25/09/2009 CLAIMING ITS STATUS AS CHARITABLE TRUST. THE ASSES SEE INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF RS.2,45,20,984/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION AND CLAIMED THE [3] SAME AS APPLICATION OF INCOME AGAINST GROSS RECEIPT S OF RS.1,89,49,894/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE AMOUNT CLAIMED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSE E. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO LEVIED THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF TH E ACT. 5. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO LEARNED CITA) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), BIKANER WHO HAD SUSTAINED THE D ECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT WHEREIN THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS DELETED. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT AFTER APPEAL EFFECT OF THE ITAT ORDER THERE WAS NO TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND IF NO ADDITIONAL TAX REMAINED AFTER APPEAL EFFECT, NO PENALTY SHOULD BE IMPOSED U/S 271 (1)(C) OF THE ACT. 5.1 THE LEARNED CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMIS SIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, DELETED THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: IN THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD IMPOSED PENALTY U /S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, BEFORE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE ITAT JODHPUR BENCH, ON ADDI TIONS MADE BY THE A.O. NOW WHEN THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS DELE TED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. THERE IS NO QUESTION OF IMPOSING PENALTY, AFTER CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRC UMSTANCES, IT IS HELD THAT THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE A.O. WAS NOT JUSTIFIED, THE SAME IS, THEREFORE, CANCELLED. NOW THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. IN THE PRESENT [4] CASE, IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ADDITIONS, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY WAS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HAS BE EN DELETED BY THE ITAT, THEREFORE, NO ADDITIONAL TAX REMAINED. AS SUC H PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS NOT LEVIABLE. IN THAT VIE W OF THE MATTER, WE DO NOT SEE ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THI S ISSUE. 7. IN ALL OTHER APPEALS I.E. I.T.A. NO.323, 324 & 3 25/JODH/2013, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL BUT ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN THE A MOUNT OF THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF TH E ACT, THEREFORE, OUR FINDINGS GIVEN IN RESPECT OF I.T.A. NO.321/JODH/201 3 IN THE FORMER PART OF THIS ORDER SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS FOR THESE A PPEALS ALSO. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THES E APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT. 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/07/2013) SD/. SD/. ( HARI OM MARATHA ) ( N. K. SAINI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER DATED:15/07/2012 *CL SINGH COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. D.R. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR