Pitambar Datt, Delhi V. ITO, Ward- 51(2), New Delhi

ITA 9026/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7933 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 271B

Judgement Text

ITA No.- 9026 & 9027/Del/2019 Pitambar Datt Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:-9026 & 9027/Del/2019 ( Assessment Year: 2010-11) Pitambar Datt 2126, 2NP-14, Gali No.5, Prem Nagar, Delhi Vs. ITO Ward – 51 (2) New Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN No: AMJPD3014E Assessee By : Sh. Jaspal Singh, CA Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM (A) These appeals by Assessee are filed against the orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi-13, [“Ld. CIT”, for short], dated 31.05.2019 and 19.09.2019 for Assessment Year 2010-11. Grounds taken in these appeals of Assessee are as under: ITA No.9026/Del/2019 (A.Y.2010-11) 1. The appellate order are not justified in the eyes of law. ITA No.- 9026 & 9027/Del/2019 Pitambar Datt Page 2 of 5 2. The learned CIT (Appeal) failed to appreciate the facts placed on the record that it is not a case of concealment where the learned A.O. itself has estimated the income by applying the discretion rate to create the liability against the appellant. 3. The appellant suffered the loss and there was only one instance where the assessee got the profit @ 2.3%, however, he was assessed @ 4%, thus, the maximum justification have already been ended, concealment is not proved anywhere, therefore, the imposition of penalty is not justified in view of the clauses given under section 271(l)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the appellant craves his right to amend, delete or add any grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing. ITA No.9027/Del/2019 (A.Y.2010-11) 1. The appellate order framed is not justified in the eyes of law. 2. The learned CIT (Appeal) failed to appreciate the facts placed on the record during the course of appellate proceedings, it is an admitted fact the appellant was not maintaining the books of accounts and the learned A.O. has imposed the penalty U/s 271A then simultaneously an action of 271B was not justified. 3. Where the learned A.O. has admitted the gross receipts and had estimated the income by taking the same figures the imposition ITA No.- 9026 & 9027/Del/2019 Pitambar Datt Page 3 of 5 of penalty u/s 271B was not justified. 3. That the appellant craves his right to amend, delete or add any grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing. (B) At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”, for short) for the Assessee informed us that the assessee has opted to settle the aforementioned appeal under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) and that the assessee has filed the relevant forms. He drew our attention to letter dated 16 th August, 2021 from assessee’s side in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) giving intimation of the same. It was also submitted by him that assessee has filed prescribed forms under VSVS; and Form-5 (to be) issued by designated authority under VSVS, is awaited and has not been received so far. In view of this, the learned AR as well as the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative) [“Ld. CIT(DR), for short] submitted before us that this appeal may be treated as withdrawn and may be dismissed on account of the aforesaid VSVS. After due consideration, we are of the opinion that these appeals have become infructuous on account of aforesaid VSVS, and this appeal may be treated as withdrawn on account of the aforesaid VSVS. Accordingly, this appeal having become infructuous, is treated as withdrawn and is hereby dismissed. (B.1) Before we part, we hereby clarify, by way of abundant caution, that if for some reason the disputes under these appeals before us are not settled under ITA No.- 9026 & 9027/Del/2019 Pitambar Datt Page 4 of 5 the aforesaid VSVS, then the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of either or both of these appeal(s), in accordance with law. (C) In the result, this appeal is dismissed. This order was already pronounced orally on 23 rd November, 2021 in Open Court, in the presence of representatives of both sides, after conclusion of the hearing. Now this order in writing is signed today on 23.11.2021 . Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:23/11/21 (Neha) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA No.- 9026 & 9027/Del/2019 Pitambar Datt Page 5 of 5 Date of dictation Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT 23.11.2021 Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order