The Commissioner of Income tax, Surat V. M/s My Home Developers, Surat

ITA 3326/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9971 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRADIPKUMAR MAJUMDAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER. ITA NOS.3326 /AHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 2(3), ROOM NO.612, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT - 395001 APPELLANT VS. M/S. MY HOME DEVELOPERS, 1, ORNATE HOUSE, NR. ALTHAN BAMROLI BRIDGE, ALTHAN, SURAT-395007 RESPONDENT PAN: AAOFM5336K / BY REVENUE : SHRI PRADIP KUMAR MAJUMDAR, SR. D.R. /BY ASSESSEE : WRITTEN SUBMISSION /DATE OF HEARING : 18.10.2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.11.2016 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS REVENUES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 A RISES AGAINST THE CIT(A)-1, AHMEDABADS ORDER DATED 22.09.2015 IN APP EAL NO. CAS- I/334/2014-15, DELETING PENALTY OF RS.23,56,125/- P ERTAINING TO SECTION 80IB(10) DEDUCTION DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION OF RS.76,2 5,000/-, IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ; IN SHORT THE ACT. ITA NO.3326/AHD/2015 (DCIT VS. M/S. MY HOME DEVELOP ERS) A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 - 2. FACTS OF THE CASE APPEAR TO BE IN A VERY NARROW COMPASS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS IMPOSED THE ABOVE STATED PENA LTY QUA SECTION 80IB(10) DISALLOWANCE OF RS.76,25,000/- HEREINABOVE AS MADE IN THE COURSE OF A REGULAR ASSESSMENT FRAMED ON 20.03.2013. WE NOTICE FROM ASSESSEES WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS THAT A CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ITS QUANTUM APPEAL ITA NO.2966/AHD/2014 HAS DELETED THE ABOVE DISALLOWANCE /ADDITION. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT DISPUTE THIS F ACTUAL POSITION. HIS ONLY CASE IS THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. THE FACT HOWEVER REMAINS THAT THE IMPU GNED SECTION 271(1)(C) PENALTY HAS NO LEGS TO STAND AS OF NOW SINCE THE QU ANTUM DISALLOWANCE/ADDITION ITSELF STANDS DELETED. WE TH US FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE LOWER APPELLATE ORDER UNDER CHAL LENGE ACCEPTING ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THIS PRECISE REASON. 3. THIS REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. [PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 21 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016.] SD/- SD/- (N. K. BILLAIYA) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 21/11/2016 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ! / CONCERNED CIT 4 !- / CIT (A) ( )*+ ,--. . /0 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1 +23 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / . // . /0