ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. Woco Motherson Elastomer Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6272/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 91067 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 04-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJHA
• Keywords: Benefit of exemption
• Section: 10B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. GEORGE GEORGE K, JM ITA NO. 6272- 73 /DEL/2013 A.Y. 2005-06 & A.Y. 2006-07 ITO WARD- 18(3) NEW DELHI VS WOCO MOTHERSON ELASTOMER LTD. IIIRD FLOOR, F-7, BLOCK B-1, MOHAN COOPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MATHURA ROAD NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAACW5183B ASSESSEE BY : SH. P. DAM KANU NJHA, SR. DR REVENUE BY : SH. K.M.GUPTA ADV. , SH. ANKUSH KUTHIALA C.A DATE OF HEARING : 04.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04 .06.2015 ORDER PER BENCH, THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST T HE SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A)- XXI, NEW DELHI EACH DATE D 12/09/2013. 2. COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED AND THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER, SO THESE ARE DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLI DATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. IN I.T.A. NO. 6272, TH E GROUNDS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT READ AS UNDER :- ITA NO. 6272-73/DEL/2013 2 LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN CANCELLING THE PENALTY OF RS. 2,37,55,050/- IMPOSED BY AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES, LEAVE O R RESERVING THE RIGHT TO AMEND, MODIFY, ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUND(S ) OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 3 . IN I.T.A. NO. 6273 FOR THE A.Y. 2006-07 THE GROUNDS RAISED ARE SIMILAR, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IN THE AMOUNT INVOL VED. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE ADDITIONS ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTIES WERE LEVIED BY THE A.O. U/S 271(1) (C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) HAVE BEEN DELE TED BY THE ITAT IN QUANTUM APPEALS IN ITA NO. 6050 AND 234/DEL./2011 VIDE COMMON ORDER DATED 17.5.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 -06 AND 2006-07. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) RIGHTLY DELETED THE PENAL TY LEVIED BY THE AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS, THE LD. DR ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AO BUT COULD N OT CONTROVERT THE ABOVE SAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE ITA NO. 6272-73/DEL/2013 3 IT IS NOTICED THAT THE A.O. LEVIED THE PENALTY FOR THE REASON THAT EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S 10B OF THE ACT HAD BEEN DENIE D, THE SAID ORDER OF THE AO WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER , THE ITAT VIDE COMMON ORDER DATED 17.05.2013 IN ITA NO. 6050 AND 234/DEL./2011 HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED T O THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 10B OF THE ACT AND DELETED THE ADDITI ON. THEREFORE THE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C ) WAS LEVIED BY THE AO IS NOT INEXISTENCE. ON A SIMILAR ISSUE, THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF K.C.BUILDERS AND ANOTHER VS. ACIT (2 004), 265 ITR 562, HELD AS UNDER :- WHERE THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY FOR CONCEALMENT IS LEVIED, A RE DELETED, THERE REMAINS NO BASIS AT ALL FOR LEVYING PENALTY F OR CONCEALMENT AND, THEREFORE, IN SUCH A CASE NO PENAL TY CAN SURVIVE AND THE PENALTY IS LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED. ORDINARILY, PENALTY CANNOT STAND IF THE ASSESSMENT ITSELF IS SE T ASIDE. 6. IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO SINCE THE ADDITION WH ICH WAS THE BASIS FOR LEVYING LEVIED IN THE PENALTY HAS BEEN DELETED. THE REFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONFIRMED VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS FULLY JUSTIF IED IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES LEVIED BY THE A.O. FOR THE A.Y. S 2005-06 AND 2006- ITA NO. 6272-73/DEL/2013 4 07 U/S 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THESE APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT ARE DIS MISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 04/06/2015) SD/- SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 04 /06/2015 *BINITA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA NO. 6272-73/DEL/2013 5 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 4/06/2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 4/06/2015 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.