Income Tax Officer-2(3), Kanpur V. Shri Rahul Prakash,

ITA 65/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4045 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN I.T.A. NO. 65 / LKW / 16 A SSESSMENT YEAR: 2003 - 04 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 65 / LKW /201 6 ITO - 2(3) KANPUR ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2003 - 04 VS. SHRI RAHUL PRAKASH C/O SHREE GANESH FARMS, VILLAGE - P I PALIA, KICHHA - 263148, DISTT. U.S.NAGAR, UTTARAKHAND. PAN: - ACMPP 6483 G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R 3. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE NOTED THAT IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED THE PENALTY ON THE ASSESSEE AMOUNTING TO RS. 28,10,000/ - IN RESPECT OF QUANTUM ADD ITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER D URING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TREATING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME SH OWN BY THE AMOUNTING TO RS. 77,2 9,500/ - AS INCOME FROM OTHER PER P. K. BANSAL , A .M. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) KANPUR, DATED 02.11.2015 FOR A SSESSMENT Y EAR 20 03 - 04 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL RELATE TO THE DELETION OF THE PENALTY OF RS. 28,10,000/ - LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM , D.R. RESPONDENT BY SMT. ANJALI RAHUL PRAKASH DATE OF HEARING 11.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.08.2016 IN I.T.A. NO. 65 / LKW / 16 A SSESSMENT YEAR: 2003 - 04 2 SOURCES AND ALSO MAKING THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE B ANK AMOUNTING TO RS. 12,12,000/ - . 4. A GAINST THE ADDITION THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 02.11.2015 AGAINST THE DELETION OF THE QUANTUM OF ADDITION. 5 . THE LD. AR BEFORE US POINTE D OUT THAT REVENUE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL. 6 . LD. DR ALSO DID NOT DENY THIS FACT. 7 . IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE QUANTUM ADDITION STAND DELETED. WE DO NOT FIND ANY ILLEGALITY OR INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT. 8 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.08.2016. ) SD/ - SD/ - ( ABY T. VARKEY ) ( P. K. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 11.08.2016 *S HARAD 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