ASST CIT CEN CIR 8(4), MUMBAI V. VIREN AHUJA, MUMBAI

ITA 5247/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2451 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K KARDA M
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 260A; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER& SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER. ITA NO. 5247 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) THE ACIT, CENT. CIR.8(4) ROOM NO.658, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MK ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 ... APPELLA NT VS. SHRI VIREN AHUJA, 1, NEELKANTH, ROAD NO.6, CHEMBUR, MUMBAI 400 020 PAN:AACPC 4809M .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K.KARDAM RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J.P.BAIRAGRA DATE OF HEARING : 19/07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22/07/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORD ER PASSED BY CIT(A)- 36, MUMBAI DATED 21/08/2015, WHICH IN TURN ARISES O UT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1 )(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 29/03/201 4. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLL OWING GROUND OF APPEAL:- 2 ITA NO. 5247 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CANCELLING THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271 (1)(C) OF THE ACT BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITAT DELETING THE QU ANTUM ADDITION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE DECISION OF THE ITAT DELETING THE QUANTUM ADDITION HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED AND APPEAL UNDER SEC TION. 260A IS BEING FILED. 3. THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, IN WHO SE CASE AN ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS FINALIZED ON 8/6/2012. IN THE COURSE OF SUCH ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, AN ADDITION OF RS.2,70,88,882/- WAS MADE BY INVOKING SECTION 68 OF THE ACT HOLDING THAT UNSECURED CREDITS FROM FIVE DIFFERENT PARTIES WERE UNEXPLAINED. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON SUCH ADDITION, WHICH HAS S INCE BEEN DELETED BY THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT IN THE QUANTUM PROCEE DINGS, THE ADDITION ITSELF HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER IN ITA NOS. 3890/, MUM/2013 DATED 29/04/2015. AS A CONSEQUENCE, THE CI T(A) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT . 4. BEFORE US, IT WAS A COMMON POINT BETWEEN THE PAR TIES THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29/04/2015(SUPRA) CONTI NUES TO HOLD THE FIELD AND, THEREFORE, NO ERROR CAN BE FOUND IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DELETING THE PENALTY IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C ) OF THE ACT WITH RESPECT TO THE ADDITION, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. THUS, THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A) IS AFFIRMED AND REVENUE FAILS IN ITS APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/07/2016 SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOU NTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 22/07/2016 3 ITA NO. 5247 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) VM , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT , 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI