ITO, Rishikesh V. Ms. Rajni Bisht, Rishikesh

ITA 6195/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0024 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SAHAY
• Assessee Lawyers: A K AGARWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH F FF F : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE , VICE , VICE , VICE PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT AND SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO INTURI RAMA RAO INTURI RAMA RAO INTURI RAMA RAO, , , , ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO ITA NO . .. . 6195/DEL/2013 6195/DEL/2013 6195/DEL/2013 6195/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR : : : : 2005 2005 2005 2005 - -- - 06 0606 06 INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -1, 1, 1, 1, RISHIKESH. RISHIKESH. RISHIKESH. RISHIKESH. VS. VS. VS. VS. MS. RAJNI MS. RAJNI MS. RAJNI MS. RAJNI BISHT, BISHT, BISHT, BISHT, D/O SHRI PREM SINGH BISHT, D/O SHRI PREM SINGH BISHT, D/O SHRI PREM SINGH BISHT, D/O SHRI PREM SINGH BISHT, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, NEHRU MARG, NEHRU MARG, NEHRU MARG, NEHRU MARG, RISHIKESH. RISHIKESH. RISHIKESH. RISHIKESH. PAN : AJIPB8829M. PAN : AJIPB8829M. PAN : AJIPB8829M. PAN : AJIPB8829M. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VIKRAM SAHAY, SR.DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI TARUN KUMAR, ADVOCATE AND SHRI A.K. AGARWAL, CA. DATE OF HEARING : 10.04.2015 10.04.2015 10.04.2015 10.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.05.2015 06.05.2015 06.05.2015 06.05.2015 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER G.C. GUPTA PER G.C. GUPTA PER G.C. GUPTA PER G.C. GUPTA, VP , VP , VP , VP : :: : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5-06 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-II, DEH RADUN DATED 16 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013. 2. THE ONLY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE I S AS UNDER:- WHETHER THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE A.O. DID NOT TRAVEL BEYOND THE FIN DING IN QUANTUM TO JUSTIFY LEVY OF PENALTY AND COMPLETELY IGNORED THE FACTS AS MENTIONED IN PARA I TO VI IN THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 20.11.2012 WHICH JUSTIFY THE LEV Y OF CONCEALMENT AND MENS-REA OF ESCAPEMENT OF TRUE PARTICULARS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA-6195/DEL/2013 2 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET, S UBMITTED THAT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE SINCE TH E DISPUTED AMOUNT OF PENALTY WAS `3,76,000/-, WHICH IS APPARENTL Y LESS THAN THE MANDATORY LIMIT OF `4,00,000/- PRESCRIBED BY THE CBD T FOR FILING AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE WORD TAX IN THE CIRCULAR OF THE CBDT INCLUDES PENALTY AND THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE DELHI TR IBUNAL DATED 28 TH JULY, 2011 IN ACIT VS. ASHOK BHASIN VIDE ITA NO.4623/ DEL/2009. 4. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE WORD TAX DOES NOT INCLUDE PENALTY IMPOSED ON THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THE PRESE NT APPEAL SHOULD BE HELD AS MAINTAINABLE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PER USED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED CIT(A). WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE WHETHER TAX INCLUDES PENALTY IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE DELHI TRIBUNAL IN ASHOK BHA SIN (SUPRA). THE DISPUTED AMOUNT OF PENALTY IN THIS CASE IS ADMITTEDLY LESS THAN `4,00,000/-, THE MANDATORY LIMIT LAID DOWN BY THE C BDT FOR FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THESE FACTS, WE HOLD THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH MAY, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( (( ( INTURI RAMA RAO INTURI RAMA RAO INTURI RAMA RAO INTURI RAMA RAO ) )) ) (G. (G. (G. (G. C. GUPTA C. GUPTA C. GUPTA C. GUPTA ) )) ) ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VK. ITA-6195/DEL/2013 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT : INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -1, RISHIKESH. 1, RISHIKESH. 1, RISHIKESH. 1, RISHIKESH. 2. RESPONDENT : MS. RAJNI BISHT, MS. RAJNI BISHT, MS. RAJNI BISHT, MS. RAJNI BISHT, D/O SHRI D/O SHRI D/O SHRI D/O SHRI PREM SINGH BISHT, PREM SINGH BISHT, PREM SINGH BISHT, PREM SINGH BISHT, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, 177/180, ASHUTOSH NAGAR, NEHRU MARG, RISHIKESH. NEHRU MARG, RISHIKESH. NEHRU MARG, RISHIKESH. NEHRU MARG, RISHIKESH. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR