Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6116 (ITAT-PUNE)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
5 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
25-09-2020
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
B
Assessment Year
2007-2008
Appeal Filed On
18-05-2015
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.718/PUN/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 S.C. THAKUR & BROS., PLOT NO.265/1, OM SADNIKA URAN ROAD, PANVEL, DIST. RAIGAD PAN : ABJFS9254L VS. ITO, WARD-4, PANVEL APPELLANT RESPONDENT / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DA TED 10-02-2015 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (AP PEALS)- 2, CONFIRMING PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER ALSO CALLED THE ACT) THANE IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. BEFORE WE PROCEED FURTHER, IT IS RELEVANT TO MENTION THAT TH E ASSESSEE IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS AGGRIEVED ONLY BY THE PENALTY CONFIRMED IN RESPECT OF THREE ADDITIONS, NAMELY, RS.37,69 ,005/-, ASSESSEE BY SHRI HARI KRISHAN REVENUE BY SHRI MADAN THIRMANPALLI DATE OF HEARING 25-09-2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25-09-2020 ITA NO.718/PUN/2015 S.C. THAKUR & BROS., 2 RS.1,51,60,000/- AND RS.8,59,200/- AGGREGATING TO RS.1,97,88,205/-. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS A REGISTERED FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CONSTRUCTION, INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND UNDERTAKES GOVERNMENT PROJEC TS. SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S.132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 07-02-2008. CERTAIN INCRIMIN ATING DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND. THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE DETERMIN ING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.28,09,97,872/-. THEREAFTER, PENALTY WA S IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.1,80,57, 656/-. THE FIRST APPEAL ALLOWED PART RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVE D THEREBY, THE ASSESSEE HAS APPROACHED THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. FOR THE PURPOSES OF PRESENT APPEAL, WE ARE CONCERNED WITH ONLY THREE ADDITION S WHICH HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) IN PARAS 4, 5 AND 6 OF THE PENALTY ORDER. THE FIRST AMOUNT REFE RS TO THE ADDITION OF RS.48,69,491/- MADE BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSME NT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES INCURRED OUT OF BOOKS. THIS AMOUNT WAS DEDUCED ON THE BASIS OF DATA FOU ND ON COMPUTER AT THE TIME OF SEARCH, WHICH WAS TAKEN OF CD. TH E LD. ITA NO.718/PUN/2015 S.C. THAKUR & BROS., 3 CIT(A) REDUCED THE ADDITION TO RS.37,69,005/-. THE SECO ND ADDITION IS OF EXPENSES OF RS.2.29 CRORE WHICH WERE NOTED BY THE AO AS NOT HAVING BEEN REFLECTED IN THE ASSESSEES BOOKS O F ACCOUNT. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS SOME M ISTAKE IN TOTAL AND THE CORRECT AMOUNT STOOD AT RS.1,51,60,000/-. T HE THIRD AMOUNT IS ILLEGAL EXPENSES OF RS.8,59,200/- FOR WHICH THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WAS SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A). APART F ROM THE ABOVE THREE AND CERTAIN OTHER ADDITIONS, THE ASSESSEE HAD D ECLARED GP RATE OF 9.37%, WHICH WAS INCREASED IN THE FIRST APPEAL TO 10%. 5. WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN QUANTU M PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS OBSERVED ON PAGES 13 TO 19 OF THE O RDER DATED 26-02-2020 (IN ITA NO.4169/MUM/2011) THAT THERE WAS NO NEED FOR SEPARATE ITEMIZED ADDITIONS AS THE LD. CIT(A) ENHANCED THE GROSS PROFIT RATE FROM 9.37% REPORTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO 10%. THUS, THESE THREE ADDITIONS CONSTITUTING FILAMENT OF PENALTY ASSA ILED IN THE EXTANT APPEAL WERE HELD AS A PART OF THE OVERALL GROSS PROFIT ADDITION AND HENCE, GOT DELETED. IT IS ERGO MANIFEST THAT THE THREE ITEMIZED ADDITIONS, WHICH FORM SUBJECT MATTER OF THE INSTANT APPE AL, NO MORE SURVIVE AS THESE STAND DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN Q UANTUM PROCEEDINGS. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING FACTS, THERE CANN OT BE ANY QUESTION OF IMPOSITION OF PENALTY QUA THE THREE ITEMS REFERRED TO ITA NO.718/PUN/2015 S.C. THAKUR & BROS., 4 ABOVE. WE, THEREFORE, ALLOW THE APPEAL BY ORDERING TO D ELETE THE PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) IN RESPECT OF THE THREE AMOUNTS AS DIS CUSSED HEREINBEFORE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SY AL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VIC E PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 25 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020 SATISH / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. THE CIT(A)-2, THANE 4. 5. THE CIT-2, THANE , , / DR B, ITAT, PUNE 6. / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE ITA NO.718/PUN/2015 S.C. THAKUR & BROS., 5 DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 25-09-2020 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 25-09-2020 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *
