ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s Havells India Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 6416/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3172 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV DUDEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT JAIN
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA NO. 6416/DEL/2015 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 ACIT, CIR.2, CIR.1 (I/C)- LTU, NBCC PLAZA PUSHP VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110017 VS M/S. HAVELLS INDIA LTD. 1/7, RAM KISHORE ROAD, DELHI-110054 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAACH0351E ASSESSEE BY : SH. ROHIT JAIN, CA REVENUE BY : SH. GAURAV DUDEJA, SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 11 . 1 1 .20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18 .11 .20 20 ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-22, NEW DELHI DATED 08. 09.2015. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESS EE: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T, ACT, 1961 TO RS.1,35,900/- AS AGAINST PENALTY OF RS. 3,86,00,000/- IMPOSED BY THE A O. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 TO RS. 1,35,900/- AS AGAINST PENALTY OF RS. ITA NO. 6416/DEL/2015 HAVELLS INDIA LTD. 2 3,86,00,000/- IMPOSED BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT SOME OF THE ADDITIONS MADE WERE OF DEBATABLE NATURE IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS EXPLANATION. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 TO RS.1,35,900/- AS AGAINST PENALTY OF RS. 3,86,00,000/- IMPOSED BY THE AO IGNORING THE FACT THAT IN VIEW OF EXPLANATION 1 TO SECTION 271(1) OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961 THE ONUS IS ON THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW BY COGENT AND RELIABLE EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS NO CONCEALMENT OF INCOM E AND WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DO. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 TO RS.1,35,900/- AS AGAINST PENALTY OF RS. 3,86,00,000/- IMPOSED BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THA T SOME OF THE ADDITIONS MADE WERE OF LEGAL NATURE IGNOR ING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS EXPLANATION THAT WRONG APPLICATION OF LAW BY IT WAS BONA-FIDE. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1 )(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 TO RS.1,35,900/- AS AGAINST PENA LTY OF RS. 3,86,00,000/- IMPOSED BY THE AO IGNORING THE RATI O OF DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MA K DATA PVT. LTD. VS. CIT (2013) 358 ITR 593 (SC) WHERE IN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT EVEN VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE DOES NOT RELEASE THE ASSESSEE FROM THE MISCHIEF OF PENAL PROCEEDINGS. ITA NO. 6416/DEL/2015 HAVELLS INDIA LTD. 3 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO, ADD TO, ALTER, AMEND OR VARY FROM THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT OR BEFORE T HE TIME OF HEARING. 2. IN THIS CASE, PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) HAS BEEN LE VIED ON THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER VARIO US HEADS VIZ. DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA), DISALLOWANCE OF PR OVISION FOR SALES INCENTIVES, DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM OF DEDUCTIO N U/S 80IC, DISALLOWANCE OF EXCHANGE LOSS AND ADDITION MADE IN RESPECT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE GAINS. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTI CE THAT THE QUANTUM ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO STANDS DELETED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 10.11.2020 AND HENCE, THE PEN ALTY DOES NOT SURVIVE. 4. THE FACTS HAVE NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE LD. DR. SINCE ALL THE QUANTUM ADDITIONS STANDS DELETED, WE HEREBY HOL D THAT THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) DO NOT SURVIVE AT THIS JUNCTURE. 4. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/11/2020. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (DR. B . R. R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER DATED: /11/2020 *BINITA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT ITA NO. 6416/DEL/2015 HAVELLS INDIA LTD. 4 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE INITIAL 1. DICTATED BY MEMBER 18 .11.2020 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 18.11.2020 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 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. 11. DATE OF UPLOADING