AMAR AJIT PARIKH, MUMBAI V. ACIT 19 (1), MUMBAI

ITA 3939/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8840 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BRAJENDRA KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A , MUMBAI BEFORE S HRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM ) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) ITA NO. 3939 /MUM/201 9 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 09 - 10 AMAR AJIT PARIKH, 62A, 2 ND FLOOR, MITTAL BHAVAN, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI - 400026 PAN: AK DPP7038C VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 19(1), MATRU MANDIR, 2 ND FLOOR, TARDEO, MUMBAI - 400007 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI BRAJENDRA KUMAR (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 30/12 /2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30 / 12 /2020 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.04.2019 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 30 (FOR SHORT THE CIT(A) , MUMBAI , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 , WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED T HE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED U/S 271 (1 ) (C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) ON THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND S : - 1. THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.06.2017 PASSED U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT IS BAD IN LAW SINCE THE PROPER SATISFACTION WAS NEITHER RECORDED IN THE NOTICE U/S 271 (1) (C) NOR IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE PENALTY WAS INITIATED ON BOTH THE LIMBS I.E. FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AND FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND LEVIED ON CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME WHICH IS IMPERMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW. THUS, THE NOTICE U /S 271 (1) (C) 2 ITA NO. 3939 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 09 - 10 AND SUBSEQUENT PENALTY ORDER ARE BAD IN LAW AND THE SAME MAY BE QUASHED AND SET ASIDE. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE CONCEALMENT PENALTY LEVIED BY THE LD. A.O. U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,38,961/ - WITHOUT APP RECIATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NEITHER CONCEALED ANY PARTICULARS OF INCOME NOR FURNISHED ANY INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THUS, THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT IS UNJUSTIFIED AND THE SAME MAY BE DELETED. 3 . THIS CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 30.12 .2020. HOWEVER, WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) INFORMED THAT IN THIS CASE THE DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED THE DECLARATION AND UNDERTAKING IN THE PRESCRIBE D FORM FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 . THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION DATED 23.12.2020 , FOR WITHDRAWAL OF THE SAID APPEAL STATING THAT HE HAS FILED DECLARATION U/S 4 OF THE VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 IN FORM NO . 1 AND 2 AS PRESCRIBED IN THE DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS RULE 2020 FOR SETTLEMENT OF THE PENALTY DEMAND AND THE SAID DECLARATION HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI 19. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO ENCLOSED PHOTOCOPY OF FORM NO. 3 ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION 1 OF SECTION 5 OF THE SAID ACT. 5. IN VIEW OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, WE DISMISS THE PRESENT APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 30 TH DECEMBER , 2020 UNDER RULE 34 (4) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJESH KUMAR ) ( RAM LAL NEGI ) ACCOUNTANT M EMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 30 / 1 2 /2020 ALINDRA, PS 3 ITA NO. 3939 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 09 - 10 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI