Income Tax Officer-5(2), Lucknow V. M/s Prayagraj Power Generation Company Ltd.,

ITA 552/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4442 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P YADAV COST ACCOUNTANT

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.552 & 553/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S PRAYAGRAJ POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD., SECTOR-128, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR, NOIDA VS INCOME TAX OFFICER-5(2), LUCKNOW PAN AAECP 2746 B (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI AMIT NIGAM, DR APPELLANT BY SHRI B.P. YADAV COST ACCOUNTANT RESPONDENT BY 06/04/2016 DATE OF HEARING 22 /0 4 /2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY REVENUE AND THESE A RE DIRECTED AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A)-II, LUCKNOW BOTH DATE D 22.04.2015 FOR AYS 2010-11 & 2011-12. BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TO GETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CO NVENIENCE. 2. IN BOTH THESE APPEALS, THERE IS ONLY ONE GRIEVAN CE OF THE REVENUE I.E. REGARDING DELETION OF THE PENALTY IMPOSED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT OF RS.16,85,300/- IN ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2010-11 AND RS.84,96,210/- IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 3. LD. DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE PENALTY ORDE R IN BOTH THE YEARS WHEREAS IT IS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE T HAT IN QUANTUM PROCEEDING, ENTIRE ADDITION WAS DELETED BY THE TRIB UNAL IN BOTH YEARS IN ITA 2 NOS.625 & 626/LKW/2013 DATED 26.02.2016. HE SUBMITT ED A COPY OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER IN QUANTUM PROCEEDING OF THE ASSES SEES OWN CASE FOR THESE VERY TWO YEARS I.E. ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 20 11-12 AND SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE SUCH ADDITION IN FULL HAS BEEN DELETE D BY THE TRIBUNAL IN QUANTUM PROCEEDING, THE PENALTY CANNOT SURVIVE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIN D THAT IN BOTH YEARS IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, ENTIRE ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, PENALTY IMPO SED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN BOTH THESE TWO YEARS CANNOT SURVIVE. UND ER THESE FACTS, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN BOTH APPEALS. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE A RE DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DAT E MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (A.K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 22 /04/2016 AKS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTR AR