DCIT (OSD) I CEN RG 7, MUMBAI V. VIDHI DARSHI RUIA, MUMBAI

ITA 4038/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2234 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAWN KUMAR BEERLA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD D RASAM

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER / I .T.A. NO . 4038/MUM/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011 - 12 THE DCIT (OSD) - 1, CENTRAL, RANGE - 7, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400 020 / VS. SMT. VIDHI DARSH I RUIA, 6A,SAM U DRA GAURAV APARTMENT, ABDUL GAFARKHAN ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 025 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAUPR 4091A ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI PAWN KUMAR BEERLA / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI PRAMOD D. RASAM / DATE OF HEARING : 0 2 . 1 2 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 2 .12 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 40 , MUMBAI D ATED 25.3.2014 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11 - 12 . 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 32.85 LAKHS MADE IN RESPECT ON THE ITA. NO. 4038/M/2014 2 CONCESS ION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE PROPERTY LET OUT BY A COMPANY IN WHICH HE IS A DIRECTOR. THE REVENUE IS FURTHER AGGRIEVED BY NOT TREATING THE SAID CONCESSION AS COVERED BY SEC. 2(24 ) (IV) OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT IDENTICAL ISSUES WERE THERE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN A.YRS 2005 - 06 AND 2007 - 08 TO 2009 - 10 AND THE MATTER WENT UPTO THE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. THE LD. COUNSE L FURNISHED THE ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL . 4. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY CONCEDED TO THIS. 5. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION OF THE AO AT PARA - 4.8 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2005 - 06 HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE APPEAL IS PENDING DISPOSAL BEFORE THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ACCEPTED AND ADDITION OF RS. 32,85,121/ - IS MADE TO THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULAR OF HER INCOME, THEREFORE, I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE OF INITIATION OF PENALTY AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 6. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE AO WAS WELL AWARE OF THE DECISION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE MERELY BECAUSE THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT CANNOT BE A REASON FOR MAKING THE AD DITION. ITA. NO. 4038/M/2014 3 7. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN A.Y 2005 - 06 IN ITA NO. 1059/M/2009, A.Y. 2007 - 08 IN ITA NO. 961/M/11, A.Y. 2008 - 09 IN ITA NO. 5171/M/11 AND .Y. 2009 - 10 IN ITA NO. 05/M/2013 HAVE DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. RESPECTFU LLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 2 ND DECEMBER , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( PAWAN SINGH ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 2 ND DECEMBER , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS / 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