Arun Duggal, New Delhi V. ACIT, Central Circle- 4, New Delhi

ITA 5448/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3239 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ISHTIYAQUE AHMED
• Section: 271(1)(c); 250

Judgement Text

Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORESHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5448/Del/2019 (Assessment Year:2010-11) ArunDuggal, HN-1406F, Second Floor, Gali NO. 13, Govindpuri, Kalkaji, New Delhi PAN: AGUPD5708Q Vs. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : ShriKapilGoel, Ld. Adv Revenue by: Mr. Ishtiyaque Ahmed, Ld. CIT DR Date of Hearing 13/04/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/04/2022 O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. The present appeal is preferred by the Assessee/Appellantherein against the order dated 30.12.2018 impugned herein passed by CIT(A)-23, New Delhi (hereinafter called in short as the “ld. Commissioner”), u/s 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2010-11, whereby the ld. Commissioner imposed the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, to the tune of Rs. 4,30,74,854/- @ 125% of the quantum of income determined by him. Page | 2 2. In this case,the assessment order dated 30.12.2017 was passed by the AO u/s 153Aof the Act for the Assessment Year under consideration and total income of the Assessee was determined at 13,62,32,600/- as against the returned income of Rs.5,14,140/-. 3. Against the said assessmentorder, the Assessee preferred first appeal before the ld. Commissioner who vide order dated 30.12.2018 in appeal, further enhanced the income of the Assessee to the tune of Rs. 2,12,25,000/-as unexplained credit of the Assessee for the Assessment Year under consideration. 4. The ld. Commissioner also initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of particulars of income and ultimately while passing impugned order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, imposed the penalty of Rs. 4,30,74,854/- @ 125% of the quantum of income allegedly sought to be evaded as determined by him. 5. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the Assessee has preferred the instant appeal. 6. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. At the outset, it was claimed by the ld.AR and not refuted by the Ld. DR that the Hon’ble Tribunal vide its order dated 19.01.2021 has allowed the Assessee’s quantum appeal no. ITA No. 1819/Del/2019against the order dated 30.12.2018 passed by the ld.Commissioner u/s 250 of the Act and deleted the addition on the basis of which the penalty was imposed by the Ld. Commissioner. Since the addition on the basis of which penalty was levied, hasalready been deleted, thepenalty cannot survive. Consequently, the penalty is deleted. Page | 3 7. In the result, appeal of the Assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2022. -Sd/- -Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (N.K. CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated:29/04/2022 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi