Amanshil realtors (P) Ltd., Delhi V. DCIT Circle-2(2), New Delhi

ITA 7397/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7508 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 27; 37; 43

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.7397/DEL/2019 Assessment Year 2012-13 Amanshiel Realtors Pvt. Ltd., 135, F.F. Tribhuvan Complex, Mathura Road, Ishwar Nagar, Delhi. v. DCIT, Circle-2(2), New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAFCA0296G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Sachin Agarwal, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R Date of hearing: 30 06 2022 Date of pronouncement: 14 07 2022 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: Th e cap tio n ed ap peal h as b een filed at th e in s tan ce o f th e assesse e ag ain st t h e o rd er o f th e Co mmiss io n er o f Inco me Tax (Ap p eals)-I, New Delh i [‘CIT(A)’ in sh o rt] d a ted 1 2.0 7 .2 019 arisin g fro m th e a ssess men t o rd er d ated 1 9 .0 1 .2 01 5 p assed b y the Assessin g Offic er (AO) u n d er Sectio n 1 43 (3 ) o f th e In co me Tax Act, 1 9 6 1 (th e Act ) co n cern in g AY 20 1 2 -1 3 . 2 . As p er th e g ro un ds o f ap p eal , th e a ssessee h as ch al le n g ed imp o si t io n o f p en alty o f Rs.1 4 ,9 2 ,1 0 1 /- lev ied u nder Sectio n 2 7 1 (1 )(c) o f th e A ct. 3 . Th e assess ee is en g ag ed in th e b u sin ess o f trad in g o f sh ares/co mmo d i ti e s an d fu tu re an d o p tio n . Th e ass essee fi led I.T.A. No.7397/DEL/2019 2 retu rn o f in co me d eclarin g lo ss o f Rs.6 1 ,0 5 ,0 0 5 /- fo r th e Assessmen t Year 2 0 12 -13 in q u esti o n . Th e retu rn fi led b y th e assesse e was su b j ected to scru t in y assess men t. Th e Assessin g Officer assess ed th e to ta l lo ss fil ed b y th e assesse e a t Rs.1 2 ,7 2 ,1 5 0 /- as ag ain st th e lo ss o f R s.9 1 ,8 1 ,2 3 5 /- assessed b y mak in g cer ta in ad d itio n s an d d i sal lo wan ces. Th e assess ee ch all en g ed th e ad d it io n s an d d isal lo wan ces b efo re th e C IT(A) and th erea fter b e fo re ITAT in th e q u an tu m p ro ceed in g s. Th e p en alty o n ad d itio n s/d isa l l o wan ces mad e is s u b ject ma t ter of co n tro v ersy . 4 . Wh en th e mat ter was called fo r h earin g , th e ld . co u n sel fo r th e ass essee ad v e rted to th e ap p ell ate o rd er o f th e Trib u n al in q u an tu m p ro ceed in g s in ITA No .2 6 50 /Del/2 0 1 6 o rd er dated 1 6 .0 1 .20 2 0 an d sub mi tted th a t d isal l o wan ces to ward s in terest o n b o rro wed cap ita l an d d ep reciat io n h as b een set aside to th e fi le o f th e Assessin g Officer fo r cert ain factu a l v erifica tio n s. Th e ld . co u n sel th u s su b mit ted th at th e ad d i t io n s/d isa llo wan ces h av e b een d elet ed /se t as id e b y th e CIT(A)/ITAT in q u an tu m p roceed in g s an d o n ly two ite ms o f ad d itio n s/d isa llo wan ces su rv iv es as o n d ate, i.e ., d is al lo wan ce o f d o n atio n o f Rs. 5 ,0 0 0 /- an d d isall o wan ce o f in teres t o n d elay ed p ay men t o f in co me tax at R s.2 ,16 ,0 0 0 /-. It was co n ten d ed o n b ehal f o f th e ass ess ee th a t in th e l i gh t o f th e ju d g men t o f th e H o n ’b le Sup reme C o u rt in th e case of Re lia n ce Petro Pro d u cts Pv t. Ltd . (2 0 1 0 ) 3 2 2 ITR 1 58 (S C), th e imp o si t ion o f p en alty o n mer e mak in g o f cla i m is n o t su sta in able in law an d d o es no t tan ta mo u n t to fu rn ish in g o f in accu rate p articu l ars o f in co me . Th e ld . co u n sel acco rd in g ly p lead ed fo r exonerat in g th e assesse e fro m th e ch arg e o f p en alty u n d er Sectio n 27 1(1 )(c) o f th e Act . I.T.A. No.7397/DEL/2019 3 5 . Th e ld . DR fo r th e Rev en u e, o n th e o th er h an d , co n te n d ed th at th e as sesse e h as d elib era te ly a n d fals ely c la imed in tere st o n in co me t ax as rev en u e ex p en ses wh ich is g ro ssly in accurate an d a fa lse cla i m. Th e ld . DR a cco rd in g ly relied u p o n th e ju d g men t ren d ered b y th e Ho n ’b le Delh i Hig h Co u rt in th e case o f CIT vs. Zo o m Commu n icatio n s Pvt . Ltd . , 2 3 3 CTR 46 5 (2 0 10 ) fo r imp o si t io n o f p enalty o n th e d isallo wan ce o n in terest o n In co me Tax . As reg ard s the o th er ite ms o f d isal lo wan ces/add it i o n s, th e ld . DR rel ied u p o n th e o rd ers o f th e lo we r au th o riti es. 6 . We h av e carefu ll y co n sid ered th e riv als su b missio n s . Th e d isal lo wan ce o f d o n atio n ap p ears to h av e b een carried o u t merely o n acco u n t o f n o o b jectio n fro m th e asses see . Wh ile th e d isal lo wan ce o f d o n atio n may thu s b e ju stifi ed in qu an tu m p ro ceed in g s, imp o sit io n o f p en alty th ereo n in resp ect o f su ch u n p ro v ed clai m o f s mal l a mo u n t i s n o t ju sti fi ed . T he p en alty imp o sed o n su ch a d d itio n is th u s rev ersed . 7 . As reg ard s, th e d isal lo wan ce o f in te rest o n late d ep o s it o f In co me Tax u n d er Sect io n 3 7 (1 ) amo u n tin g to Rs.2 ,1 6,0 0 0 /-, we n o te th at th e cl a im o f th e assess ee is n o t o n ly prima fa cie in co rrect in law a n d wh o lly with ou t an y b asis, th e e x p lan atio n fu rn ish ed b y th e assessee fo r mak in g su ch clai m is d ev o id o f an y b o na fid e b asis . As sta ted o n b eh alf o f th e R ev en u e, th e assess ee h as, in fac t, co n tes ted th e d isal lo wan ce b efo re th e ap p ellat e au th o ritie s in th e q u an tu m p ro ceed in g s. Th e assess ee h a s fa il ed to o ffer an y ex p lan atio n fo r su ch clai m an d h as merely r eli ed u p on th e ju d g men t o f th e Ho n ’b le Su p reme Co u rt in th e case o f Rel ia n ce Petro Pro d u ct (su p ra ) wh ich is ad mit ted ly n o t ap p licab l e in th e p resen t c ase . It is n o t a mere wro ng clai m of ex p en ses b u t I.T.A. No.7397/DEL/2019 4 th e ac tio n o f th e assesse e is ap p aren tly b eset w ith tr ap p in g o f fa lseh o o d . In th e lig h t o f th e ju d g men t o f Ho n ’b le Delh i Hig h Co u rt in th e case o f Zo o m Co mmun ica tio n s (su p ra ), we see n o mer it in th e p le a o f th e assesse e as reg ard s th e p en alty on d isal lo wan ce o n acco u n t o f in teres t o n in co me tax . To th e ex ten t o f p en alty co mp o n en t o n su ch amo u n t, we d eclin e t o in terfere . Ho wev er, th e o th er ite m o f d isa llo wa n ces/ad d it io n s d o n o t q u a for imp o si t io n o f p en alty u n d er Sectio n 2 7 1 (1 )(c) wh ere th e ad d it io n s mad e h av e b een set asid e o r d elete d owin g to th e fact th at su ch ad d itio n s/d is al lo wan ces, a t b es t, can b e reg ard ed as wro n g clai ms o f d eb atab le n a tu re. Co n seq u en tly , t h e p en alty o n oth er i te ms o f d isal lo wan ces/ad d i tio n s s tan d s d ele te d . 8 . In th e resu l t, th e a p p eal o f th e asses s ee is p art ly a l lo wed . Order pronounced in the open Court on 14/07/2022. Sd /- Sd /- [KUL BHARAT] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: /07/2022 Prabhat