ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. Saubhagya Investofin Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 3762/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4113 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 07-10-2010
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KRISHNA B
• Assessee Lawyers: M L DUJARI

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 3762/DEL/2010 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3762/DEL/2010 ASSTT. YEAR: 2001-02 ITO, VS SAUBHAGYA INVERSTOFIN P.LTD., WARD 7(4), K 3/65, DLF CITY, C.R.BUILDING, P HASE-II, GURGAON. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI KRISHNA B. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI M.L. DUJARI O R D E R PER G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, V.P. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDE R OF CIT(A)-X, NEW DELHI DATED 31.5.2010 FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR 2001-02. THE ONLY DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)( C) OF THE ACT. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE ON 28.1.2004 ON AN INCOME OF RS.6,03,980 AGAINST RETUR NED INCOME OF RS.73,140. IN THAT PROCESS, HE DISALLOWED THE EXPE NSES CLAIMED UNDER VARIOUS HEADS AS ACCORDING TO HIM THERE WAS NO BUSI NESS ACTIVITY DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE QUANTUM DISALLOWANCES BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE ITAT. THE ITAT CONFIRMED THAT ITA NO.3762/DEL/2010 2 ORDER, HOWEVER IT RESTORED THE MATTER BACK TO THE F ILE OF THE AO FOR A LIMITED PURPOSE TO DETERMINE ANY EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN CO NNECTION WITH EARNING INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND TO ALLOW IF THAT PERT AINS TO SUCH EARNINGS. THE ASSESSMENT WAS AGAIN COMPLETED ON 17.11.2008 AT THE SAME INCOME. ACCORDING TO THE AO, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE A NY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM THAT EXPENDITURE B ELONGED TO THE OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME. AS THE RECORDS REVEAL, THE AO HA D ORIGINALLY IMPOSED A PENALTY OF RS.2,09,947 AND THE CIT)(A) VIDE ORDER D ATED 7.8.2006 CANCELLED THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. IT IS NOT KNOWN WHETHER THE DEPARTMENT QUESTIONED THAT ORDER BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL. BE THAT AS IT MAY, THE AO AGAIN LEVIED THE PENALTY IN THE ASSESSMENT M ADE IN PURSUANCE OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER AND IMPOSED THE PENALTY VIDE HIS ORD ER DATED 21.5.2009. 3. THE CIT(A) AFTER REPRODUCING THE EARLIER PROCEED INGS WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE CIT(A)-X VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 7.8.2006 HAD ALREADY CANCELLED THE PENALTY AFTER DISCUSSING/APPRECIATING THE MERITS AN D FACTS OF THE CASE AND HE CONCURRED WITH THIS ORDER. 4. THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. WE HA VE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND GONE THROUGH THE RECORDS. IN OUR VIEW, T HE PENALTY HAS RIGHTLY BEEN DELETED BY THE CIT(A). THE REVENUE HAS ALREADY ACC EPTED THE ORDER DATED 7.8.2006 OF THE CIT(A) DELETING THE IMPUGNED PENALT Y ON THE SAME SET OF ITA NO.3762/DEL/2010 3 FACTS. IT IS NOT OPEN TO THE REVENUE TO AGAIN IMP OSE THE PENALTY WHICH WAS ALREADY ONCE CANCELLED BY THE CIT(A) ON MERITS AND DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED THAT ORDER. WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE SAME. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29.4.2011. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV ) (G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DT. 29 TH APRIL 2011 GS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. ITO,WARD 7(4) NEW DELHI. 2. SAUBHAGYA INVESTOFIN PVT. LTD. 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 4. DR BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR