Pawan Kumar Agarwal HUF, Kanpur V. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur

ITA 70/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 7023714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: DHEERAJ AGARWAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 70 /LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:200 2 - 0 3 PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL, HUF 110/15, 80 FEET ROAD, KANPUR. PAN:AABHP8068A VS. A.C.I.T., RANGE - 3, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI DHEERAJ AGARWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI ALOK MITRA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 0 2 /07/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 7 /07/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - I I, KANPUR DATED 18 / 12 /201 3 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 2 - 200 3 . 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. BECAUSE THE ORDER OF CIT APPEAL IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON FACTS. 2. BECAUSE THE ORDER OF REASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY WAS IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED CIT APPEALS - II, KANPUR HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT, LUCKNOW BENCH 'A' LUCKNOW IN ITA NO.371/LUC/06 VIDE ORDER DATED 28/02/2007. 3. BECAUSE THE CIT APPEALS - II HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ORDER DATED 28/02/2007 OF HON'BLE ITAT PRONOUNCED IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT. 4. BECAUSE THE QUANTUM ADDITION IS ALREADY QUASHED, THEREFORE, THE PENALTY DOES NOT SURVIVE. 5. BECAUSE IT IS A CASE OF LACK OF OPPORTUNITY, BECAUSE THE NOTICES SENT BY THE CIT (APPEALS) COULD NOT REACH THE APPELLANT DUE TO CHANGE OF ADDRESS. 2 THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO OR AMEND THE AFORESAID GROU NDS BEFORE DISPOSAL OF APPEAL. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS , THE TRIBUNAL HAS QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN I.T.A. NO.371/LKW/2006 DATED 07/02/2007. HE SUBMITTED THE COPY OF THE TRIBUNAL DECISION. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT WHEN ASSESSMENT ITSELF IS QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL, PENALTY IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT S URVIVE. 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT AS PER THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS , THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRA M ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL. WHEN THE ASSESSMENT ITSELF HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE TRIBUNAL, THE PENALTY IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NO LEGS TO STANDS AND HENCE, WE DELETE THE PENALTY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ABOVE) SD/. SD/. (SU NIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 7 /07/2014. *C.L.SINGH 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