1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.599/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 2006 ADDL. C.I.T., SPECIAL RANGE, KANPUR. VS. M/S RAVE ENTERTAINMENT (P) LTD., JAGRAN BUILDING, 2, SARVODAYA NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN : AABCR5768A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI P. K. KAPOOR, C.A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, SR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING 19/02/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 6 /02/2016 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-II KANPUR ON 27/05/2015 FOR A. Y. 2005 06. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 4 GROUNDS BUT THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE E IS ABOUT DELETION OF PENALTY OF RS . 106,79,749/- IMPOSED BY THE A.O. U/ 271 (1) (C) OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961. 3. HEARD BOTH SIDES. THIS IS THE MAIN ARGUMENT THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE JUDGMENT OF HONBL E ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RENDERED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2006 07 AS REPORTED IN 376 ITR 544. IN THAT YEAR ALSO, PENALTY WAS IMPOSED AFTER D ISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 80IB AS IN THE PRESENT YEAR. LEARN ED DR OF THE REVENUE 2 COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY DIFFERENCE IN FACTS. HENCE BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS JUDGMENT OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RENDE RED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2006 07, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN T HE ORDER OF CIT (A). 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODI A ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED:26 TH FEBRUARY, 2016. *SINGH 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. REGISTRAR