Himalaya Fincon (P) Ltd., Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4298/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 74388 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL SINGH
• Keywords: Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U. B. S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 4298 & 4299/DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 & 2008-09) HIMALAYA FINCON (P) LTD., VS. ACIT, CENT. CIRCLE- 5, C/O RAJ KUMAR & ASSOCIATES, NEW DELHI C.A., 4435/7, ANSARI ROAD, DARYA GANJ, DELHI PAN/GIR NO.: AAACH7376R (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJ KUMAR, CA DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI SATPAL SINGH, SR. DR ORDER PER U B S BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE TWO APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST CONSOLIDATED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT-XXXI,, NEW DEL HI DATED 30.04.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2010-2011 BUT T HESE APPEALS CONCERN THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2008-09 RESPECTIVE LY, WHEREBY CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- FOR EACH YE AR IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(B) HAS BEEN CHALLENGED. 2. IT IS THE MAIN CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT O N SIMILAR BASIS AND WITH REGARD TO THE SAME NOTICE, LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE PENALTY FOR TWO YEARS AND CONFIRMED THE PENALTY FOR OTHER TWO YEARS WHEN THERE IS NO CHANGE OF FACTS. SO, IT WAS PLEADED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE THAT THERE CANNOT I.T.A. NOS.4298 & 4299/DEL/2013 2 BE DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT FOR TWO YEARS OUT OF 4 YE ARS AS FOR THE TWO YEARS PENALTY HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AND FOR OTHER YEARS, THE SAME HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE SAME ORDER BY THE SAME CIT(A). IT WAS ALSO PLEADED THAT SIMILAR PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 TO 2010-2011 (FOR 7 YEARS) WERE IMPOSED ON THE STATED NON COMPLIANCE OF SAME NOTICE AND THE SAME WAS ALSO DELETED BY LD. CIT(A) VIDE ORDER OF S AME DATE. SO, BY FILING COPY OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN RESPECT TO ALL T HE 7 APPEALS, IT WAS PLEADED FOR DELETION OF THE PENALTY FOR BOTH THE Y EARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 3. LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BE LOW TO PLEAD FOR CONFIRMATION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITH RESPECT TO THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, CONSIDERED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD AND FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED ANY D ISTINGUISHING FEATURES IN DELETING THE PENALTY FOR TWO YEAS AND CONFIRMING TH E PENALTY FOR THESE TWO YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION WHEN THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES ARE THE SAME. THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AN D MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE CANNOT BE ANY DIFFERE NTIAL TREATMENT WHEN CAUSE OF ACTION IS THE SAME WITH RESPECT TO THE SAME STAT ED NON COMPLIANCE. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT TO DELETE THE PENALTY FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION AS IMPOSED BY THE A.O. AND CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A). 5. AS A RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AR E ALLOWED. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH MARCH, 2014. SD./- SD./- (S. V. MEHROTRA) (U.B.S.BEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 28 TH MARCH, 2014. SP. I.T.A. NOS.4298 & 4299/DEL/2013 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-XXV, NEW DELHI AR, ITAT, 5. CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI NEW DELHI