RAMA SAHAEBRAO WAGHMARE, MUMBAI V. ITO 22(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 4385/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1223 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKASH KUMAR AGARWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JM ITA NO. 4385 / MUM/20 1 6 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 10 ) SHRI RAMA SAHEBRAO WAGHMARE, SHOP NO.1, PLOT NO.147, NEAR GHANRAJ HOTEL SECTOR 22, TURBH E NAVI MUMBAI 400 705 VS. ITO 22(3)(3), MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. AAFPW5440F APPELLANT ) .. RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI HARESH P. SHAH REVENUE BY SHRI VIKASH KUMAR AGARWAL DATE OF HEARING 10 / 04 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEME NT 12 / 04 /201 7 / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M) : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) 26, MUMBAI DATED 28/03/2016 FOR THE A.Y.2009 - 10 IN THE MATTER OF PENALTY IMPOSED U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT. 2. RIVAL CONTENT IONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PERUSED. 3. AO HAS LEVIED PENALTY VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 25/06/2012 WITH RESPECT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: - 1. PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES RS. 3,18,466/ - 2. CESSATION OF LIABILITY U/S. 41(1) RS. 2,58,216/ - 3. ADDITION U/S.40A( 3) RS. 12,505/ - 4. INTEREST PAID ON LOANS RS. 1,89,205/ - 5. UNVERIFIED LOANS AND ADVANCES RS.61,95,692/ - TOTAL RS.69,74,084/ - ITA NO. 4385/MUM/20 16 SHRI RAMA SAHEBR O WAGHMARE 2 4. IN AN APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 22/12/2015, THE CIT(A) DELETED ALL THE ADDITIONS EXCEPT ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.3,18,466/ - . 5. IN VIEW OF THE QUANTUM ADDITIONS BEING DELETED BY CIT(A), PENALTY DO NOT SURVIVE IN RESPECT OF ADDITION SO MADE EXCEPT PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES. WE FOUND THAT ISSUE OF PRIOR PERI OD EXPENSES IS DEBATABLE IN SO FAR AS ASSESSEE HAS GENUINELY CLAIMED THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED DURING THE YEAR, BUT THE AO DISALLOWED THE SAME BY PRESUMING THAT IT IS RELATED TO THE EARLIER YEAR. AS PER OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) IS NOT IMPO SABLE IN RESPECT OF SUCH DEBATABLE ISSUE. ACCORDINGLY AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE PENALTY IMPOSED FOR DISALLOWANCE OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES OF RS.3,18,466/ - . 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 12 / 04 /2017 S D/ - ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) S D/ - ( R.C.SHARMA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 12 / 04 /201 7 KARUNA SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGIST RAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//