DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI V. TWO BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3723/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4278 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B S N RAJUDR
• Assessee Lawyers: DR K SHIVARAM; NEELAM C JADHAVAR
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI E BENCH , ,, , , ,, , , BEFORE S/SH. RAJENDRA,ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER & SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER /.ITA NO.3723/M/2012, ! ' /ASSESSMENT YEAR-2006-07 DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3) ROOM NO.609, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020. VS M/S. TAO BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 142, ATLANTA BUILDING, 14 TH FLOOR NARIMAN POINT,MUMBAI-400 021. PAN:AADACT 3547 N ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) !#$ /ASSESSEE BY : DR. K. SHIVARAM & MS. NEELAM C. JADHAV-(AR) / REVENUE BY : SH. B.S.N. RAJU-(DR) / DATE OF HEARING : 09-11 -2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.01.2016 , 1961 1961 1961 1961 254 254 254 254( (( (1 11 1) )) ) &'$ ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA, AM - CHALLENGING THE ORDER DT.02.01.2012 OF THE CIT(A)-7 , MUMBAI THE ASSESSING OFFICER(AO)HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL .EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEA L IS ABOUT DELETION OF PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO. 2. ASSESSEE-COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 07.1 1.2006 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1.40 CRORES.THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ON 26.11.200 8,U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT,ASSESSING ITS INCOME AT RS.1.44CRORES.WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESS MENT, THE AO HELD THAT INCOME ARISING TO THE ASSESSEE ON SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY WAS TO B E ASSESSED AS BUSINESS INCOME AND NOT AS CAPITAL GAINS.ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WAS CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY (FAA). 3. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WERE INITIATED ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME.IN RESPO NSE TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FOR LEVYING CONCEALMENT PENALTY THE ASSESSEE FILED DETAILED EX PLANATION,VIDE ITS LETTER DT. 03.01.2011.AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE,THE AO L EVIED PENALTY OF RS.1.47 CRORES U/S. 271 (1) (C)OF THE ACT ON 10.03.2011. AGGRIEVED BY THE PENAL TY ORDER OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FAA.AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISS ION OF THE ASSESSEE,THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE PENALTY ORDER THE FAA HELD THAT THE AO HAD CHA NGED THE HEADS OF INCOME AND IT COULD NOT BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN THE MEANWHILE,THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE QUANTUM ADDITION.VIDE ITS ORDER,DT.06.08. 2014(ITA/ 8454/MU M/2010),THE TRIBUNAL RESTORED BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE FAA FOR FRESH ADJUDICATIO N. ITA 3723/M/12(06-07) 2 4. WE FIND THAT THE QUANTUM APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THE FAA HAS TO RE- ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE.IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES,WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE AO WOULD NOT SURVIVE. AS A RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE AO STANDS DISM ISSED. ! '# . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST JANUARY, 2016. 1 2016 SD/- SD/- ( /SANJAY GARG) ( ) / RAJENDRA) *+ , / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /MUMBAI, /DATE: 01.01.2016 . . . .. . JV.SR.PS. )$ *'$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ %.0 -2 , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / %.0 -2 5. DR A BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . *+ . 6. GUARD FILE/ ' //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / + DY./ASST. REGISTRAR + + , /ITAT, MUMBAI.