, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! , % !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3363/CHNY/2018 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 3(4), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S VR GLOBAL ENERGY PVT. LTD., II FLOOR, TEMPLE TOWER, 62, ANNA SALAI, NANDANAM, CHENNAI - 600 035. PAN : AABCT 3716 E (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SH. SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADVOCAT E 1 / 2% / DATE OF HEARING : 01.04.2019 3') / 2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.04.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -11, CHENN AI, DATED 27.09.2018 DELETING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER 2 I.T.A. NO.3363/CHNY/18 UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2. SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON MERIT. HOWEVER, ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, THE HIGH COURT ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE B Y DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON QUANTUM. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R ., THE REVENUE HAS ALREADY FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE APEX COURT A GAINST THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, THEREFORE, THE CIT(A PPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SH. SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE HIGH COURT BY ITS JUDGMENT DATED 24.08.2018 DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD . COUNSEL, THERE CANNOT BE ANY LEVY OF PENALTY, HENCE, THE CIT(APPEA LS) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THIS TRIBUNAL 3 I.T.A. NO.3363/CHNY/18 CONFIRMED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN QU ANTUM APPEAL. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST THE QUANTUM ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFO RE THE HIGH COURT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED AND T HE ADDITION WAS DELETED. CONSEQUENTLY, THE CIT(APPEALS) DELETED TH E PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER. NO W THE REVENUE CLAIMS THAT AN APPEAL HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED BEFORE THE APEX COURT AND THE SAME IS PENDING. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT AS ON TODAY, THE QUANTUM ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER WAS DELETED BY THE HIGH COURT AND IT IS NOT CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HIGH COURT IS STAYED BY THE APEX CO URT. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED O PINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS AT LIBE RTY TO PASS A FRESH ORDER OF ASSESSMENT IN CASE THE APEX COURT REVERSES THE JUDGMENT OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL OF THE RE VENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 4 I.T.A. NO.3363/CHNY/18 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 9 TH APRIL, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESA N) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 9 TH APRIL, 2019. KRI. / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A)-11, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-3, CHENNAI 5. 7: -2 /DR 6. ;( < /GF.