DCIT, Cir.-7, Pune V. Yutaka Autoparts, Pune Ltd., Pune, Pune

ITA 450/PUN/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 45024514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: R D ONKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I C SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO 450 & 451/PN/10 (ASSTT. YEAR: 2005-06 & 2006-07) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, .. APPELLANT CIR.7, PUNE VS. YUTAKA AUTOPARTS PUNE LTD., RESPONDENT GAT NO 316, VLLAGE KASAEABOLI, OFF URAWADE ROAD, TAL. MULSHI, PUNE - PAN AABCT3928L APPELLANT BY: SHRI SANJAY SINGH RESPONDENT BY: SHRI R D ONKAR ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, AM THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAIN ST SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ( APPEALS)-III, PUNE DATED 10.12.2009 WHICH, IN TURN, HAVE ARISEN F ROM PENALTY ORDERS DATED 30.4.2009 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN S HORT THE ACT), PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 & 2006-07 RESPECTIVELY. 2 2. THE SOLITARY ISSUE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS BY THE RE VENUE RELATES TO THE CANCELLATION OF THE PENALTY OF RS 3,64,034/- AND RS 17, 30,339/- BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005- 06 AND 2006-07. 3. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT -ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR ISSUE HAD COME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 30.6.2011 IN ITA NO 1276/PN/10 HAS AFFI RMED THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) CANCELLING THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THOUGH THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE, DEFENDED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVYING THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES, DID N OT DISPUTE THE FACTUAL MATRIX POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE OF LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT HAD COME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE OUR CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE ASSESSE ES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 (SUPRA), AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS DEL ETED THE PENALTY IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)( C) OF THE ACT BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSI ONS. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HARSHWARDHAN CHEMICALS & MINERALS LTD. (SUPRA), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN LAID DOW N THAT WHERE AN ARGUABLE, CONTROVERSIAL AND DEBATABLE DEDUCTION IS CLAIMED, T HE CLAIM COULD NOT BE SAID TO BE FALSE, OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY ASSESSEE T O RAISE ANY CLAIMS OR DEDUCTIONS WHICH MIGHT BE DEBATABLE AND IT WAS NOT THE INTENTI ON OF THE LEGISLATURE TO MAKE PUNISHABLE SUCH CLAIMS, IF THEY WERE NOT ACCEPTED. FURTHER WE FIND THAT THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V RELIANCE PETROPR ODUCTS (P) LTD. 322 ITR 158 (SC) HAS LAID DOWN THE PROPOSITION THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE, PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) IS NOT ATTRACTED; MERE MAKING OF THE CLAI M, WHICH IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW, BY ITSELF, WILL NOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING INACCURATE PA RTICULARS REGARDING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF T HE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS (P) LTD. (SUPRA), WE AFFI RM THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) DELETING THE PENALTY IMPOSED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL FAILS. 3 ON SIMILAR PARITY OF REASONING, WE AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) CANCELLING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005-06 AND 2006- 07. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 5 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEM BER PUNE, DATED: 5 TH AUGUST, 2011 B COPY TO:- 1) ASSESSEE 2) DEPARTMENT 3) THE CIT (A)-III PUNE 4) CIT-IV PUNE 5) DR, A BENCH, ITAT, PUNE. 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASST. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., PUNE