Sh. Ishwar Chand Jindal, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5040/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4202 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Question of law
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 68; 132; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARSIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 5040/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 ISHWAR CHAND JINDAL, VS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME-TAX C-603 (C-27) JHULE LAL APTS., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 6, NEW DELHI PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI. (PAN: AAIPJ2703R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: MS SUMANGLA SAXENA & SHRI AJIT JHA RESPONDENT BY: SMT. RITU SHARMA ORDER PER K. NARSIMHA CHARY, JM AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER DATED 21.4.2014 IN APPEAL NO .56/14-15/63/15-16 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A)-25, NEW DELHI (FOR SHORT HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE LEARNED CIT(A)), THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THIS APPEAL. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT PURSUANT TO THE SEARCH A ND SEIZURE U/S 132 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 CONDUCTED IN ASSESSEES CASE O N 26.3.2010, NOTICE U/S 153A WAS ISSUED AND THE ASSESSEE FILED THEIR RETURN OF I NCOME ON 10.10.2011SHOWING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.4,18,250/-. HOWEVER, THE ASSESS MENT WAS COMPLETE U/S 153A 2 AND 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT C ALLED THE ACT), BY ORDER DARED 30.1.2013 AT AN INCOME OF RS.1,28,04,200/- . DURING THE ASSESSMENT LD. AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.25 LACS U/S 68 OF THE ACT, B UT IN THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, LEARNED CIT(A) MADE AN ENHANCEMENT OF RS.9,59,87,046/-UNDER SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WE RE INITIATED AND BY AN ORDER DATED 21.3.2014, LEARNED AO LEVIED A PENALTY OF RS.3 ,38,23,940/-. APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE ENDED UP IN DISMISSAL AND CONFIRMATION OF THE PENALTY. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THIS APPEAL. 3. IT IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED AR THAT WHEN THE MATTER AGAINST THE QUANTUM ADDITION WAS HEARD BY A COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.2002/2013 ALONG WITH APPEAL FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR 2005-06, BY ORDER DATED 29.5.2015 THE TRIBUNAL DELETED THE QUANTUM ADDITION S. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COU RT IN ITA NO.554/16. IT IS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ONCE THE QUANTUM IS DELETED, THE PENALTY CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO SURVIVE. THE LEARN ED DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. IN SO FAR AS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED AR TH AT A COORDINATE BE%NCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL DELETED THE QUANTUM ADDITIONS AND IT WAS CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, IS CONCERNED, THIS FACT IS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE. VIDE PARAGRAPHS 26 & 29 OF THE ORDER, THI S TRIBUNAL DELETED THE ADDITIONS MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND UNDER SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. A COPY OF THE ORDER IN ITA NO.554/16 ON THE FILE OF THE HONB LE HIGH COURT ALSO SHOWS THAT THE COURT HELD THAT NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. INASMUCH AS THE QUANTUM ADDITION IS DELE TED, NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE 3 PENALTY DOES NOT SURVIVE. WE, THEREFORE, DIRECT THE LEARNED AO TO DELETE THE PENALTY, 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACC ORDINGLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 5 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGRAWAL) (K. NARSIMHA CHARY) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 5 TH JANUARY, 2018 VJ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR