THE ACIT CIR 19(1), MUMBAI V. M/S. SUPERNA R. MOTEWANE, MUMBAI

ITA 3511/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7491 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 04-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L K AGARWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH J MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, AM & SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JM I.T.A.NO.3511/MUM/2008 - A.Y 2001-02 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., CIRCLE 19(1), MUMBAI MRS. SUPERNA R.MOTEWANE, GYAN KHAR, 14 TH ROAD, KHAR (W), MUMBAI 400 052 PAN NO.AABPK 5356 G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : MR. L.K.AGARWAL. ASSESSEE BY : MR. SHEKHAR GUPTA. O R D E R PER P.MADHAVI DEVI, JM: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST CIT (A)S ORDER DATED 25-2-2008. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT[A] IN CANCELLING THE PENALTY OF R S.5,65,400/- LEVIED U/S.271[1][C] OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONS ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY U/S.271[1][C] HAVE BEEN MADE HAD COME UP FOR CONSID ERATION BEFORE J BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A.NOS.1470 & 1731/M/0 5 AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDERS DATED 26 TH MAY, 2008 REMANDED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AND, THEREFORE, PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271[1][C] OF THE ACT, HAS NO LEGS TO STAND. A COPY OF THE SAI D ORDER OF THE 2 TRIBUNAL [CITED SUPRA], IS PLACED BEFORE US AND THE SAME IS TAKEN ON RECORD. 4. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUN AL, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO EXAMINE THE CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REFERENCE TO THE AMOUNTS PAID OR PAYABLE TO MR . GAURAV MOTWANE AND ALSO WITH REFERENCE TO THE CLAIM UNDER SEC.80HH E AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AS PER LAW. AS THE VERY BASIS FOR THE LEVY OF PENALTY HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RECONSIDERA TION, THIS PENALTY ORDER HAS TO BE CANCELLED. HOWEVER, IT IS CLARIFIED THAT THE AO IS AT LIBERTY TO INITIATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AFRESH IF T HE ADDITION, IF ANY, IS MADE AFTER RECONSIDERATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (P.MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 9 TH MARCH, 2010. P/-* COPY TO- 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CITA MUMBAI. 4) CIT CITY MUMBAI 5) DR BENCH MUMBAI TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY /ASST.REGISTRAR,ITAT MUMBAI. 3