ITO 29 (1)(1), MUMBAI V. ANJANA VIVEK NAGARAJAN, MUMBAI

ITA 5796/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8537 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MICHAEL JERALD
• Keywords: Bogus purchase
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM ITA NO. 5796 /MUM/201 8 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 ) ITO - 29(1)(1), R.NO.101, C - 10, 1 ST FLOOR B.K.C. PRATYANKSHAKAR BHAVAN, B.K.C. BANDRA (EA ST) MUMBAI 400 051 VS. MS. ANJANA VIVEK NAGARAJAN B - 303, VASANT OSCAR OASIS LBS MARG, MULUND (W) MUMBAI 400 080 PAN/GIR NO. AARPG9071A (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY SHRI MICHAEL JERALD ASSESSEE BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 08 / 01 /2 020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15 / 01 /2020 / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M) : THIS APPEAL IN ITA NO. 5796/MUM/2018 FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 39, MUMBAI IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A) - 39/I T - 10356/16 - 17 DATED 29/06/2018 (LD. CIT(A) IN SHORT) IN THE MATTER OF IMPO SITION OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CT). 2. THE ONLY ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS AS TO WHETHER TH E LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE LEVY OF PENALTY ITA NO. 5796/MUM/2018 MS. ANJANA VIVEK NAGARAJAN 2 U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES ON ESTIMATED BASIS. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATE RIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT T HE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT ON 09/03/2016 WHEREIN THE ADDITION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WERE INITIATED ON 23/09/2016 FOR T HE SAME AND PENALTY WAS LEVIED FOR RS.20 , 775 / - BY THE LD. AO. WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF BOGUS PURCHASES WAS MADE ON ESTIMATED BASIS @12.5% ON THE VALUE OF ALLEGED PURCHASES. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE PENALTY ON THE GROU ND THAT SINCE THE QUANTUM ADDITION WAS MADE ON ESTIMATE, CONCEALMENT PENALTY LEVIED THEREON WOULD NOT SURVIVE. THIS FACT IS NOT IN DISPUTE BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ALSO PLACED RE LIANCE ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH CO URT IN THE CASE OF HARIGOPAL SINGH VS. CIT REPORTED IN 254 ITR 85 ( P & H) TO SUPPORT THE SAID PROPOSITION. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE SAID REASONING OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE PENALTY. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIS MISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 15 / 01 /2020 SD/ - ( MAHAVIR SINGH ) SD/ - (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R MUMBAI ; DATED 15 / 01 / 2020 ITA NO. 5796/MUM/2018 MS. ANJANA VIVEK NAGARAJAN 3 KARUNA , SR.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//