Sh. Gurjeet Singh, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4879/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6770 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 10-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA
• Assessee Lawyers: V S AGGA RWAL
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-I NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-4879/DE L/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2004-05) GURJEET SINGH, C/O-U.S.AGGARWAL, 505, MAITRI APARTMENTS SECTOR-9, NEW DELHI PAN: AVIPS7890K (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-26(1), NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY SH.V.S.AGGARWAL, ADV. REVENUE BY MR. MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 12.01.2015 OF CIT(A)-15, DELHI P ERTAINING TO 2004-05 AY WHEREIN THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(C) BY THE AO HAS BEEN UPHELD. THE LD. AR PLACED ON RECORD COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2 015 IN ITA NO.535/DEL/2014 AND RELYING THEREON SUBMITTED THAT THE ITAT HAS QUA SHED THE ASSESSMENT RE- OPENED BY THE AO U/S 147 HOLDING IT TO BE WITHOUT A PPLICATION OF MIND AND ALSO WITHOUT ANY SERVICE. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS HIS SUBMIS SION THAT SINCE THE ADDITIONS MADE DO NOT STAND IN THE EYES OF LAW, THE PENALTY O RDER CONFIRMED IN APPEAL DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. IN SUPPORT OF THE SAID PRA YER, ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAGE 10 PARA 11 OF THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IN THE QUA NTUM PROCEEDINGS:- 11. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS DECISIONS CITED ABOVE, THE REOPENIN G IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITHOUT ANY APPLICATION OF MIND AND FUR THER THERE IS NO SERVICE OF NOTICE ISSUED 148. THEREFORE, THE REOPENING IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND CONSEQUENTLY THE SAME IS QUASHED. DATE OF HEARING 10.02.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25 . 02 .201 6 I.T.A .NO.-4879/DEL/2015 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. AR HAD NOTHING FURTHER TO STATE AS THE ADDITIONS ADMIT TEDLY STOOD DELETED AS THE ASSESSMENT ITSELF WAS QUASHED. 3. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT WHERE THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3)/147 HAVE BEEN QUASHED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH THE OCCASION TO CO NSIDER THE MERITS OF PENALTY ORDER U/S 271(1)(C) UPHELD BY THE CIT(A) ON THE ADD ITIONS MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.5,25,000/- DOES NOT ARISE. ACCO RDINGLY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY ARGUMENT TO THE CONTRARY, IT IS HELD THAT THE PENAL TY PROCEEDINGS DO NOT SURVIVE. THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH OF FEBRUARY, 2016. SD/- (DIVA S INGH) JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED:25/02/2016 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSIS TANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI