RAMKRISHNA HARI DANDEKAR, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT CIR 3, MUMBAI

ITA 5667/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92797 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 03-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PREMANAND J
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI MULCHANDANI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 54

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO . 5667 /MUM/ 2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000 - 01 SHRI RAMKRISHNA HARI DANDEKAR, LAXMI KESHAV APARTMENT, 1 ST FLOOR, BLOCK NO. 104/101, RAMESH PRADHAN MARG, NEAR NEW ENGLISH SCHOOL, NAUPADA, THANE (W) - 400 602 / VS. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 3, THANE VARDAN, M.I.D.C. WAGLE INDL. ESTATE, THANE(W) ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AEJPD 3767J ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAVI MULCHANDANI / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PREMANAND J / DATE OF HEARING : 0 3 . 0 6 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 3 .0 6 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 1 , THANE DT. 2 9 .4.201 1 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 0 - 0 1. ITA. NO. 5667/M/2011 2 2. THE SHORT GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING LEVY OF PENALTY MADE U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1610/M/2009 DT. 21.10.2014 . IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL, THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER STATED THAT BOTH THE ISSUES ONE RELATING TO THE DE TERMINATION OF SALE CONSIDERATION AND THE OTHER RELATING TO DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S. 54 OF THE ACT HAVE BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO , THEREFORE THE VERY BASIS FOR THE LEVY OF PENALTY DOES NOT EXIST. 4. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE STATED THAT THE PENALTY ORDER SHOULD ALSO BE RESTORED BACK FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 5. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN QUANTUM APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1610/M/09. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUES RELATING TO THE DETERMINATION OF SALE CONSIDERATION AND ALSO DEDUCTION U/S. 54 OF THE ACT HAVE BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. WE, ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF PENALTY AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION TAKEN IN THE QUANTUM PROCEEDING AND AFTER GIVING A FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSE E. ITA. NO. 5667/M/2011 3 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 3 RD JUNE , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( JOGINDER SING H ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 3 RD JUNE , 2015 . . ./ RJ , 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