M/s. C.J. International Hotels Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5085/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6530 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR SHARMA SENIOR
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH B BB B : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND AND AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO . .. . 5085/DEL/2011 5085/DEL/2011 5085/DEL/2011 5085/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 2005 2005 2005 - -- - 06 0606 06 M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, HOTEL LE MERIDIAN, HOTEL LE MERIDIAN, HOTEL LE MERIDIAN, HOTEL LE MERIDIAN, WINDSON PLACE, WINDSON PLACE, WINDSON PLACE, WINDSON PLACE, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 001. 110 001. 110 001. 110 001. PAN : AAACC0174E. PAN : AAACC0174E. PAN : AAACC0174E. PAN : AAACC0174E. VS. VS. VS. VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE- -- -3(1), 3(1), 3(1), 3(1), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TARANDEEP SINGH, CA. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SENIOR DR . DATE OF HEARING : 01.12.2016 01.12.2016 01.12.2016 01.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP : :: :- -- - THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-0 6 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-VIII, N EW DELHI DATED 14 TH OCTOBER, 2011. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE LEVY OF PENALTY BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1 961. 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD LEVIED THE PENALTY AMOUNTING TO `9,18,592/- IN RESPECT OF T HE FOLLOWING TWO ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES :- (I) DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON WEST TOWER - `2 ,74,500/- ITA-5085/DEL/2011 2 (II) DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST - `22,35,834/- 4. ON APPEAL, LEARNED CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE PENALTY IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION. HOWEVER, IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST, HE DIRECTED THAT THE PENALTY MAY BE LEV IED ON THE AMOUNT OF `4,40,071/-. THE REVENUE HAS ACCEPTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) WHILE THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE PENALTY SUSTAIN ED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND H AVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. AFTER CONSIDER ING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) IN RESPECT O F THE ABOVE TWO DISALLOWANCES IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS PVT.LTD. (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC), WH EREIN HONBLE APEX COURT HELD AS UNDER:- WHERE THERE IS NO FINDING THAT ANY DETAILS SUPPLIED B Y THE ASSESSEE IN ITS RETURN ARE FOUND TO BE INCORRECT OR ERRONEOUS OR FALSE THERE IS NO QUESTION OF INVITING TH E PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C). A MERE MAKING OF A CLAIM, WHICH IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW, BY ITSELF, WILL NOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS REGARDIN G THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SUCH A CLAIM MADE IN THE RETU RN CANNOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS. 6. THE RATIO OF ABOVE DECISION OF HONBLE APEX COURT WOULD BE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE. T HE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED ALL MATERIAL FACTS IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE ITEMS AND, ADMITTEDLY, THE DETAILS SUPPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS RE TURN OF INCOME ARE NOT FOUND TO BE INCORRECT OR ERRONEOUS OR FALSE. ACCORDINGLY, WE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISION OF HONBLE APEX COURT, HOLD ITA-5085/DEL/2011 3 THAT NO PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS LEVIABLE IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE DISALLOWANCES. THE SAME IS DELETED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON . 12.2016. ( (( ( SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA ) )) ) ( (( ( G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL G.D. AGRAWAL ) )) ) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT : M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, M/S C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS, HOTEL LE MERID HOTEL LE MERID HOTEL LE MERID HOTEL LE MERIDIAN, WINDSON PLACE, IAN, WINDSON PLACE, IAN, WINDSON PLACE, IAN, WINDSON PLACE, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 001. 110 001. 110 001. 110 001. 2. RESPONDENT : ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE- -- -3(1), NEW DELHI. 3(1), NEW DELHI. 3(1), NEW DELHI. 3(1), NEW DELHI. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR