DCIT, BHILWARA V. M/s. Bhilwara Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd., BHILWARA

ITA 495/JODH/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5274 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 495 / JODH /201 4 (ASST. YEAR : 200 9 - 1 0 ) DCIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA . VS. M/S. BHILWARA ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LTD., 5 KM STONE, AJMER ROAD, BHILWARA RAJASTHAN. PAN NO. AAAAB 0214 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA JAIN ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SMT. ALKA RAJVANSHI JAIN - DR DATE OF HEARING : 08 / 0 3 /201 6 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 / 03 /201 6 . O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , AJMER , DATED 31 /0 7 /201 4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DELETING THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS. 25,08,250/ - UNDER SEC. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT MADE , THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,31,20,447/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PREMIUM PAID TO LIC AND RS. 1,17,300/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK OF COW GHEE. 2 ITA NO. 495 / JODH /201 4 4 . ON APPEAL, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 80,00,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PREMIUM PAID TO LIC AND RS.1,17,300/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CLOSING STOCK. 5. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY UNDER SEC. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON ADDITI ON OF RS. 1,31,20 ,447/ - AND RS. 1,17,300/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK AND THEREBY LEVIED PENALTY OF RS. 25,08,250/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AND FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS BY THE ASSESSEE . 6. THE ASSESSEE FILE D APPEAL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HA D ALREADY GIV EN THE EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 24/04/2014 AND REDUCED PENALTY FROM RS. 25,08,250/ - TO RS. 36,246/ - IN HIS ORDER DATED 13/06/2014 . THE PENALTY ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITION FOR PAYMENT TO LIC WAS DELETED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AS THE ADDITION ITSELF WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, THE BASIS FOR LEVY OF PENALTY DID NOT SURVIVE, H E NCE, HE DELETED THE PENALTY ON THE ADDITION OF RS. 80,00,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PREMIUM PAID TO LIC. 7. REGARDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,17,300/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK , T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OBSERVED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT DELETED THE ADDITION, BUT HAD ALLOWED THE BENEFIT OF THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE TO BE CARRIED FORWARD TO THE OPENING STOCK IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. HE FURTHER OBSERVED TH A T THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AT NIL , IN COMPUTATION OF INCOME AS DEDUCTION UNDER SEC. 80P WAS ALLOWABLE TO THE EXTENT OF RS.40,08,579/ - + RS. 50,000/ - WHILE THE PROFITS WERE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 26,77,047/ - ONLY . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS SEEN THAT AFTER GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, REVISED TOTAL INCOME WAS CALCULATED AT NIL AS THE TOTAL INCOME AFTER GIVING RELIEF OF RS. 80,00,000/ - COMES 3 ITA NO. 495 / JODH /201 4 TO RS. 27,44,348/ - AND THE SAME HAS BEEN DEDUCTED OUT OF THE ELIGIBLE CLAIM UNDER SEC. 80P(2 )(D) OF RS. 40,08,579/ - . AFTER GIVING EFFECT TO THE TRIBUNALS ORDER , THE TOTAL INCOME REMAINS NIL AND THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME WAS ALSO FILED WITH NIL INCOME. HE FU R THER OBSER V ED THAT IT IS NOT A CASE OF LOSS BEING REDUCED OR LOSS BEING ALLOWED TO BE CARRIED FORWARD . HENCE, HE DELETED THE PENALTY ON THIS COUNT ALSO . 8. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY ERROR IN THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THEREFORE, WE FIND NO GOOD REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WHICH IS CONFIRMED AND THE G R OUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON TUESDAY , THE 08 TH DAY OF MARCH , 201 6 AT JODHPUR . S D / - S D / - (GEORGE MATHAN) (N.S.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER D ATED : 08 TH MARCH , 201 6 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESS E E. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R . 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., JODHPUR .