, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH B , KOLKATA [ () . . . . . . . . , ,, , , !!' #$ !!' #$ !!' #$ !!' #$ ] ]] ] [BEFORE HONBLE SRI R.S.SYAL, AM & HONBLE SRI G EORGE MATHAN, JM] & & & & /ITA NO.635/KOL/2012 '$( )*/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 (#, / APPELLANT ) - $ - ( ./#, /RESPONDENT) SPAN STOCK BROKING PVT. LTD. . A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5 , KOLKATA KOLKATA (PAN:AAECS 3860 P) #, 0 1 / FOR THE APPELLANT: NONE ./#, 0 1 / FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI APURBA KUMAR DAS, JCIT, SR.DR 2$3 0 4 /DATE OF HEARING : 13.11.2013 5) 0 4 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.11.2013. 6 / ORDER PER SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. C.I.T.(A)-VI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO.1322/CIT(A)-VI/CIR-5/09-10/KOL DATED 09.02.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAINST LEVY OF PENALTY ORD ER PASSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHR I APURBA KUMAR DAS, JCIT, SR.DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. FOR THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS BAD IN LAW, DISPUTED AND LI ABLE TO BE SET ASIDE. 2. FOR THAT FROM THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER IMPOSING PENALTY OF RS.96,100/- U/S 271(1)(C)OF THE ACT AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) FURTHER ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE HIM AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE APPELLANT. ITA NO.635/KOL/2012 SPA N STOCK BROKING PVT. LTD. VS A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5,KOL A.YR.2005-06 2 3. FOR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN UPHOLDIN G THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NEI THER FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME NOR THERE IS CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. 4. FOR THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO FILE ADDI TIONAL GROUNDS AND/OR AMEND OR ALTER THE GROUNDS ALREADY TAKEN EITHER BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON A SPECIFIC QUERY FROM THE BENCH AS TO WHETHER THE REVENUE HAS FOUND THAT THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH HAS RESULTED IN THE ADDITION WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESEE AND ON WHICH THE PENALTY OF RS.96,102/- HAS BEEN LEVIED HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE FA LSE OR NOT PLAUSIBLE, THE LD. DR HAD NOTHING TO SAY. THE FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE CLEAR LY SHOW THAT THE ADDITION U/S 14A OF THE IT ACT IS AN ESTIMATED ADDITION. THE DISALLOWAN CE U/S 94(7) OF THE ACT WAS ONLY A TECHNICAL MISTAKE WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED BY T HE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THE REASON FOR THE TECHNICAL MISTAKE. THI S EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT BEEN FOUND TO BE FALSE. IN THE CIRCUMS TANCES AS THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN FOUND TO BE FALSE NOR IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC IDENTIFICATION OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME IN THE FACTS OF THE APPEAL TH E PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO AND AS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) STANDS DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.11.2013. SD/- SD/- [ . . , ] [ .!!' #$ , ] [R.S.SYAL] [ GEOR GE MATHAN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ( (( (4 4 4 4) )) ) DATE: 13.11.2013. R.G.(.P.S.) ITA NO.635/KOL/2012 SPA N STOCK BROKING PVT. LTD. VS A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5,KOL A.YR.2005-06 3 6 0 .''7 87)9- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SPAN STOCK BROKING PVT. LTD., 16, INDIA EXCHANGE PL ACE, KOLKATA-700001. 2 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA 3 . CIT KOLKATA 4. CIT(A)- VI, KOLKATA. 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA /7 .'/ TRUE COPY, 6$2/ BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES