DCIT, CC-14, V. High Value Traders (P) Ltd.,

ITA 842/DEL/2006

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 58773 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 28-02-2012
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2006
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RENU JAUHRI
• Assessee Lawyers: V K JAIN
• Section: 14A; 260A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH `H : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.842/DEL./2006 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1999-2000) DCIT, CENTRAL CIR.14, VS. M/S HIGH VALUE TRADERS (P ) LTD., NEW DELHI. J-1/B(EXTN.), MOHAN COOP. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI. (PAN/GIR - N.A.) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI V.K. JAIN, CA REVENUE BY : SMT. RENU JAUHRI, CIT(DR) ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS EARLIER DISMISSED B Y THIS BENCH VIDE ORDER DATED 12.12.2006. AGAINST SUCH ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF APP EAL BY ITAT, THE DEPARTMENT WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT U/S 260A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAS DIRECTED VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 2 5.08.2008, WHILE REMITTING THE CASE TO ITAT, TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI V.K. JAIN, CA, SUBMITTED THAT THERE WERE THREE ISSUES ON WHICH PENALTY OF RS.1,25 ,89,915/- U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN IMPOSED AND ITAT HAS SET ASIDE TWO ADDITIONS IN RELATION TO LOSS OF SALE OF SHARES OF M/S KAJARIA CERAMICS LTD. AND FINANCIAL CHARGES DIS ALLOWED U/S 14A OF THE ACT, AMOUNTING TO RS.1,69,45,512/- AND RESTORED IT ON T HE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AS REGARDS THE THIRD ADDITION ON SALARY AND WAGES PAID TO M/S DUA ENGINEERING WORKS PVT. LTD. OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.6 LAKHS DISALLOWED BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER IS CONCERNED, SUCH DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN DELETED IN FULL, BY ITAT IN I .T.A. NO.4457/DEL./2003 DATED 30.4.2009 BY F BENCH, THEREFORE, PENALTY ON THE B ASIS OF THESE ADDITIONS NEEDS TO BE SET I.T.A. NO.842/DEL./2006 (A.Y. : 1999-2000) 2 ASIDE AND MATTER REQUIRES TO BE RESTORED ON THE FIL E OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE- DECIDING THE PENALTY AFRESH CONSIDERING THE OUTCOME OF FRESH PROCEEDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THESE TWO ADDITIONS AND TO THIS PLEA OF THE LD.COUN SEL OF THE ASSESSEE, LD.DR. DID NOT OBJECT AND VERY FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-CONSIDERATION OF THE PENALTY AFRESH. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, CONSIDERED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD AND FIND THAT PENALTY OF RS.1,25,89,915/- HAS BEEN IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH CAME TO BE DELETED BY CIT(A) IN APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACT ION OF THE CIT(A) WAS CONFIRMED BY ITAT IN DEPARTMENTS APPEAL, AGAINST WHICH DEPARTME NT FILED APPEAL BEFORE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT. THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT VID E JUDGMENT DATED 25.08.2008(SUPRA) REMITTED THE MATTER BACK TO ITAT FOR RE-DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERIT. CONSEQUENT UPON SUCH DIRECTION OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT, CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING AND BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN HEARD TO DEC IDE THE PENALTY MATTER ON MERIT. IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT TWO OF THE THREE ADDITIONS MADE B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY HAS BEEN IMPOSED, HAS ALREADY BEEN SE T ASIDE AND THE MATTER STANDS RESTORED BACK ON THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ITAT IN QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND THIRD ADDITION HAS BEEN COMPLETELY DEL ETED. SO, IT WAS PLEADED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK ON THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-DECIDING THE PENALTY MATTE R AFRESH AND TO THIS PRAYER OF LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, LD.DR DID NOT OBJECT A ND SUBMITTED THAT MATTER CAN GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-CONSIDE RATION OF THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS AFTER QUANTUM ADDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO TWO ITEMS ARE DEC IDED. AS SUCH, WHILE CONSIDERING ENTIRETY OF FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND MATERIAL ON RE CORD, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WITH RESPECT TO PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, A ND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK ON THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO RE-DECI DE THE PENALTY MATTER AFRESH AFTER TWO OF THE THREE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER A ND SET ASIDE BY ITAT ARE FINALLY DECIDED AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSE E. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. I.T.A. NO.842/DEL./2006 (A.Y. : 1999-2000) 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMEN T GETS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF HEAR ING ON 28.02.2012. (B.C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 28 .02.2012. SKB COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-III, NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(DR) BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT