Govind Harnarayan Agrawal HUF, Indore V. ITO-2(1), Indore

ITA 817/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0047 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-02-2021
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR HARSHI BARI
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY BANSAL A RS; GIRISH AGRAWAL MS NISHA LAHOTI
• Section: 271(1)(c); 250

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE - BENCH [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] [AHMEDABAD-INDORE] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.816/IND/2019 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2014-2015 MANISH GOVIND AGRAWAL (HUF) 482, GOYAL NAGAR INDORE. VS. DCIT, CIR.1(2) AHMEDABAD. ./ ITA NO.817/IND/2019 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2014-2015 GOVIND HARINARAYAN AGRAVAL (HUF) 482, GOYAL NAGAR INDORE. VS. DCIT, CIR.1(2) AHMEDABAD. / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL MS.NISHA LAHOTI, AND SHRI VIJAY BANSAL, ARS. REVENUE BY : SHRI (DR.) HARSHI BARI, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 05/07/2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06 /07/2021 !'# / O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT THESE TWO APPEALS ARE AT THE INSTANCE OF ABOVE ASSE SSEES AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD.CIT(A)-1, INDORE OF EVEN DATE D I.E. 14.6.2019 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2014-15 UNDER SECTION 271 (1)(C) OF THE ITA NO.816 AND 817/IND/2019 2 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. SINCE COMMON GRIEVANCE IS RA ISED IN BOTH THE APPEALS, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE DISPOSE OF BOTH THE APPEALS BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. ONLY GRIEVANCE RAISED BY BOTH THE ASSESSEES IS T HAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDERS OF THE LD.AO IMP OSING PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. BEFORE TAKING UP THE MATTER ON MERIT, IT IS NOTI CED THAT THE LD.REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APP LICATION STATING THAT QUANTUM, AGAINST WHICH PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT WAS IMPOSED, HAS SINCE BEEN DELETED BY THE ITAT VIDE OR DER IN ITA NO.60 AND 61/IND/2019 DATED 28.6.2021, THE IMPUGNED PENAL TY IMPOSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES DO NOT HAVE LEG TO STAND, A ND THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED. CONTENTS OF THE APPLICATION READ AS UNDER: MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONORS, ASSESSES HAD PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE YOUR HONORS AGAINST THE QUANTUM ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) U/S 250 RWS 143( 3) VIDE 1TA NO. 60/LND/2019. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID APPEAL H AS BEEN DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE BENCH IN THE FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE VIDE OR DER PRONOUNCED ON 28.06.2021. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS MOST HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE I NSTANT APPEAL ON IMPOSITION OF PENALTY IS IN-FRUCTUOUS AND MAY PLEAS E BE DISPOSED OF BY DELETING THE PENALTY SO IMPOSED. SUBMITTED SD/- (AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE) THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MADE SUBMI SSION TO THIS EFFECT AT THE BAR, AND PRAYED FOR QUASHING OF IMPUGNED PEN ALTY ORDERS. THE LD.DR DOES NOT DISPUTE THE FACTUAL POSITION OF THE MATTER AS AVERRED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THIS BEHALF. ITA NO.816 AND 817/IND/2019 3 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, AND ON PERUSAL O F THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT IMPUGNED PENALTY IN BOTH THE CASES OF THE ASSESSES STANDS EXTINGUISHED AS THE TRIBUNAL IN THE QUANTUM APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE, DELETED THE ADDITION, ON W HICH IMPUGNED PENALTY HAS BEEN IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. FURTHER, SUB-CLAUSE (III) OF SECTION 271(1)(C) PROVIDES MECH ANISM FOR QUANTIFICATION OF PENALTY. IT CONTEMPLATES THAT TH E ASSESSEE WOULD BE DIRECTED TO PAY A SUM IN ADDITION TO TAXES, IF ANY, PAYABLE HIM, WHICH SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN BUT WHICH SHALL NOT EXCEED T HREE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED BY REASON OF CONC EALMENT OF INCOME AND FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN OTHER WORDS, THE QUANTIFICATION OF THE PENALTY IS DEPENDED UPON THE ADDITION MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE IN THE PRESENT CASE, BASIS FOR VISITING THE ASSESSEE WITH PENALTY HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED BY DELE TING ADDITION BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 28.6.2021 (SUPRA), THE IM PUGNED PENALTY DOES NOT SURVIVE. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR THE REVENUE TO IMPOSE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) IN THIS CASE . THE LD.DR HAS NOT DISPUTED THE FACTUAL POSITION OF THE CASE. THEREFOR E, WE DELETE IMPUGNED PENALTY IN BOTH THE CASES OF THE ASSESSEE, AND CANC EL ORDERS OF THE BOTH THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON _6 TH ___JULY, 2021 AT INDORE. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) VICE-PRESIDENT INDORE, DATED 06/07/2021 ITA NO.816 AND 817/IND/2019 4 !'# $%& ''& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. ( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. )*) + / CONCERNED CIT 4. + ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &,- $$ , / DR, ITAT, 6. -./ 0 / GUARD FILE. !'# / BY ORDER, 1 / 2 )3 ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, ITA NO.816 AND 817/IND/2019 5 1. DATE OF DICTATION : 06-07-2021 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER. : 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./P.S : 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT. : 5. DATE ON WHICH FAIR ORDER PLACED BEFORE OTHER MEMBER : 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P.S./P.S. : 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK. : 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. : 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER. : 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER :