R. G. COLONISERS P LTD., Jaipur V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, Jaipur

ITA 931/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0098 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENDRA SINGH JCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: MADHUKAR GARG
• Keywords: Business income; Depreciation; Business expenditure; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(3); 40(a)(ia); 147; 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH JES'K LH- 'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,O A H JH FOT; IKY JKWO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 931/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., 4, THIRUPATI TRADE CENTRE, SANSAR CHANDRA ROAD, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAACR 8269 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MADHUKAR GARG (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 21.05.2019. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/05/2019. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 25 TH MAY, 2018 OF LD. CIT (A)-I, JAIPUR ARISING FROM PENALTY ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 1-12. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN HO LDING THAT IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT THE INTEREST INC OME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENT RECEIPTS HAVE TO BE SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD OTHER INCOME IN THE P & L ACCOUNT. THE SAID FINDING IS ILLEGAL AND UNJUSTIFIED. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN HOLD ING THAT INTEREST INCOME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENT RECEIPTS AR E NOT BUSINESS INCOME AND HAS TO BE ASSESSED UNDER THE HE AD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE SAID FINDING IS IL LEGAL AND UNJUSTIFIED. 2 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. 3. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN HOLD ING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS CREDITED THE SAID INCOME IN P & L ACC OUNT BUT HAS SET OFF THE SAME AGAINST VARIOUS BUSINESS EXPENSES WHICH ARE NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF EARNING THE SAID INCOME AND HENCE, THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF IN COME IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME. THE SAID FINDING IS ILLEGAL AND U NJUSTIFIED. 4. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONF IRMING THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY OF RS. 2,24,500/- UNDER THE P ROVISION OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR FURNISHING INACCUR ATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE LEVY OF PENALTY CONFIRMED IS ILLEGAL AND UNJUSTIFIED. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED AN ADDITIONAL GROUND A S UNDER :- ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND L AW THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN IMPOSING PEN ALTY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271(1)(C) WITHOUT SPECIFI CALLY POINTING OUT IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE THE CHARGE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO WHETHER THE PENALTY WAS PROPOSED ON CONCEA LMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FOR FURNISHING OF INACCURA TE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. 2. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CIVIL CONSTRUCTION ON CONTRACT BASIS. IT FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 25,61,790/- ON WHICH ASSESSMENT WAS C OMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 09.12.2013. THE AO WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT AND THEN ES TIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY APPLYING NET PROFIT RATE OF 10% ON GROS S CONTRACT RECEIPTS OF RS. 15,60,61,949/- SUBJECT TO CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION, IN TEREST PAYMENT AND PROCESSING FEE ON LOANS. THE AO ALSO MADE AN ADDITION UNDER SECTI ON 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT AT THE 3 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. TIME OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT. CONSEQUENTLY, A TOTAL ADDITION OF RS. 11,40,775/- WAS MADE BY THE AO. THEREAFTER, THE AO REOPENED THE AS SESSMENT BY ISSUING A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 ON 20 TH JANUARY, 2015 WHEREBY THE AO PROPOSED TO ASSESS INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 4,91,118/-, RENTAL INCOME OF RS. 49,500/-, PROFIT ON SALE OF CAR OF RS. 1,02,079/- AND OTHER INCOME OF RS. 1,85,821/ - TOTAL AMOUNTING TO RS. 8,28,518/- TO BE ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOUR CES AS AGAINST THE BUSINESS INCOME. WHILE PASSING THE REASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT ON 31 ST JULY, 2015, THE AO MADE ASSESSMENT OF INTEREST INCOME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENTAL RECEIPTS TOTAL AMOUNTING TO RS. 7,26,439/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND CONSEQUENTLY THE S AME WAS TREATED AS AN ADDITION. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PREFER ANY APPEAL A GAINST THE REASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO WHEREBY THE INCOME OF RS. 7,26,439 /- WAS TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES INSTEAD OF BUSINESS INCOME SHOWN BY T HE ASSESSEE. THE AO SUBSEQUENTLY INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SE CTION 271(1)(C) AND LEVIED THE PENALTY OF RS. 2,24,500/- WHILE PASSING THE ORDER D ATED 28 TH JANUARY, 2016. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) BUT COULD NOT SUCCEED. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMI TTED THAT THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271 (1)(C) AS THE ASSESSEE DISCLOSED EACH AND EVERY DETAIL IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST IN COME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS, RENTAL RECEIPTS AND, THEREFORE TREATING THESE THREE ITEMS OF INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WOULD NOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING OF INA CCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME. EVEN THE AO IN THE ORIGINAL SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) ACCEPTED THESE THRE E ITEMS AS BUSINESS INCOME OF 4 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. THE ASSESSEE AND ESTIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE BY APPLYING NET PROFIT @ 10% OF THE GROSS CONTRACT RECEIPTS. THE SOURCE OF THE INCOME FROM INTEREST, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENTAL RECEIPTS WERE DUL Y DISCLOSED IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AS OTHER INCOME AND THE AO WHILE PASSING TH E ORIGINAL SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) DID NOT TREAT THESE INCOMES SE PARATELY. THESE INCOMES ARE PART OF BUSINESS RECEIPTS AS IT WAS EXPLAINED AT TH E TIME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) AND THERE WAS NO JUSTIF ICATION FOR EXCLUDING THE SAME FROM BUSINESS INCOME AND TREATING THEM AS INCOME FR OM OTHER SOURCES. THEREFORE, ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED ALL THE DETAILS AND FACTS REGARDING THESE THREE ITEMS OF INCOME, THEN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT FALL IN THE CATEGORY OF FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS LTD. 322 ITR 158 (SC) AS WELL AS THE DECIS ION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. AMIT JAIN, 351 ITR 74 (DELHI). THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO RELIED ON A SERIES OF DECISIONS ON THIS POINT THAT ONCE THE ASSESSEE H AS DISCLOSED ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS AND DETAILS AT THE TIME OF FILING THE RETURN INCOME AS WELL AS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THEN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO WOULD NOT IPSO FACTO AMOUNT TO FURNISHING OF INACCU RATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME ATTRACTING PEN ALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO VEHEMEN TLY ARGUED ON THE ADDITIONAL GROUND CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF INITIATION OF PR OCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. HE HAS POINTED OUT THAT IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE THE AO HAS NOT SPECIFIED THE LIMB WHETHER THE PENALTY WAS INITIATED FOR FURN ISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FOR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION, HE 5 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE KARNATA KA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. MANJUNATHA COTTON & GINNING FACTORY, 359 ITR 565 (K AR.) AS WELL AS THE DECISION IN CASE OF CIT VS. SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS REPORTED IN 7 3 TAXMAN.COM 241 (KAR.). THE SLP FILED AGAINST THE SAID DECISION BY THE REVENUE WAS DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT REPORTED IN 73 TAXMAN.COM 248. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D/R HAS SUBMITTED THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED THESE THREE ITEMS OF INCOME AS BUSINESS INCOME OF T HE ASSESSEE WHEREBY THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERSTATED THE INCOME. THEREFORE, IT IS A CLEAR CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME ATTRACTING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271( 1)(C) OF THE IT ACT. AS REGARDS THE ADDITIONAL GROUND, THE LD. D/R HAS OBJECTED TO THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AT THIS STAGE WHEN IT WAS NOT RAISED BEFOR E THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE AO HAS FINALLY GIVE N A DEFINITE FINDING IN THE PENALTY ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULA RS OF INCOME, THEN NOT SPECIFYING THE LIMB IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WOULD NOT RENDER THE PENALTY ORDER AS ILLEGAL. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 25,61,790/-. THIS TOTAL INCOME INCLUDES THE INCOME FROM INTEREST, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENTAL RECEIPT S AS UNDER :- I) INTEREST INCOME RS. 4,91,118/- II) MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS RS. 1,85,821/- III) RECENT RECEIPTS RS. 49,500/- ------------------- RS. 7,26,439/- 6 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. THE AO WHILE COMPLETING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT UND ER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND E STIMATED THE INCOME BY APPLYING NET PROFIT @ 10% ON GROSS CONTRACT RECEIPTS. ACCOR DINGLY, THE AO WORKED OUT THE NET PROFIT OF RS. 36,76,251/- AS AGAINST THE NET PR OFIT DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 35,34,920/-. SUBSEQUENTLY THE AO REOPENED THE ASSES SMENT TO ASSESS THESE THREE ITEMS OF INCOME AS WELL AS INCOME FROM SALE OF ASSE T AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES INSTEAD OF BUSINESS INCOME. IN THE REASSESSMENT OR DER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147, THE AO TREATED ONLY THESE TH REE ITEMS BEING INTEREST INCOME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENTAL RECEIPTS AS INCOM E FROM OTHER SOURCES. THEREFORE, THE SAID TREATMENT OF RS. 7,26,439/- HAS ENHANCED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DUE TO THE REASON THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT F RAMED UNDER SECTION 143(3) THE AO ESTIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS PER TINENT TO NOTE THAT EVEN IF THESE RECEIPTS OF RS. 7,26,439/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST I NCOME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENTAL RECEIPTS ARE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SO URCES, IT WOULD NOT RESULT ANY REVENUE LOSS AS PER THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE TAX LIABILITY ARISES DUE TO TREATMENT OF THIS INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SO URCES ONLY BECAUSE OF THE REASON THAT THE AO ESTIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE BY TAKING THE NET PROFIT ON GROSS CONTRACT RECEIPTS. THEREFORE, AS PER THE RET URN OF INCOME, THESE INCOMES ARE PART OF THE BUSINESS PROFITS AND BY EXCLUDING THESE THREE ITEMS FROM THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, STILL THE BUSINESS INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE MORE THAN RS. 18 LACS AS DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCO ME. ONCE THE BUSINESS INCOME AS PER THE RETURN OF INCOME IS POSITIVE, THEN TREATMEN T OF INTEREST INCOME, MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS AND RENTAL RECEIPTS AS INCOM E FROM OTHER SOURCES SHALL HAVE NO CONSEQUENTIAL EFFECT ON THE REVENUE SO FAR AS TH E INCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURN 7 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. OF INCOME. EVEN OTHERWISE, THESE THREE ITEMS WERE V ERY MUCH DISCLOSED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME. THE NATURE OF SOURCE OF THESE RECEIPTS WERE ALSO EXPLAINED DURING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING S UNDER SECTION 143(3) AND ONCE THE AO HAS ACCEPTED THESE INCOMES AS PART OF THE BU SINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN MERELY BECAUSE IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THESE THREE ITEMS WERE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WOULD NOT LEAD TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS GUILTY OF FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICU LARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. FURTHER, IT IS CLEAR THAT A LL THESE PARTICULARS WERE AVAILABLE IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 139(1) OF THE ACT AND HENCE THIS CANNOT BE A CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF I NCOME. AT THE MOST, IF THE AO HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF BUSINESS INCOME, THEN IT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. TH E AO WHILE PASSING THE PENALTY ORDER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) HAS HELD AS UNDER :- IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOM E TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 7,26.439/- AND HAS SOUGHT TO EVADE TAX OF RS. 2 ,24,500/-. THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE F ACTS OF THE CASE, I FIND IT TO BE A FIT CASE FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND QUANTUM IS WORKED OUT AS UNDER :- CONCEALED INCOME RS. 7,26,439/- (4,91,118/- + 1,85,821/- + 49,500/-) (B) TAX SOUGHT TO EVADED ON CONCEALED INCOME RS. 2 ,24,469/- (C) MINIMUM PENALTY IMPOSABLE RS. 2,24,469/- (100% OF TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED) (D) MAXIMUM PENALTY IMPOSABLE RS. 6,73,408/- 8 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. (300% OF TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED) (E) PENALTY IMPOSED RS. 2,24,500/- ORDERED ACCORDINGLY U/S 271(1)(C) R.W.S. 274 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. ISSUED DEMAND NOTICE. THE AO HAS FINALLY CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS G UILTY OF CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 7,26,439/-. THIS CO NCLUSION OF THE AO IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AS THESE THREE ITEMS OF INCOME WERE VERY MUCH DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND MERELY TREATING THE SAM E AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WOULD NOT AMOUNT TO CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF I NCOME. THEREFORE, THIS CANNOT BE A CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME THOU GH THE CASE COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCO ME ON THE PART OF THE AO. THEREFORE, THE CONCLUSION OF THE AO IS APPARENTLY I NCORRECT AND WRONG. EVEN OTHERWISE, WHEN ALL THE PARTICULARS WERE ALREADY DI SCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THEN RE-CLASSIFYING THE INCOME BY THE AO WOULD NOT AMOUNT TO FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME SO AS TO HOLD THE ASSESSEE GUILTY FOR LEVYING THE PENALTY UN DER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. A MERE DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM AND TREATING THE INCOM E UNDER DIFFERENT HEAD IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C ) OF THE ACT. IN THE CASE IN HAND, EVEN IF THREE ITEMS OF INCOME ARE SEPARATELY TREATE D AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, THERE WILL BE NO REVENUE EFFECT ON THE RETURNED INC OME OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOLD THAT THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO UNDER SEC TION 271(1)(C) IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS DELETED. 9 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. 5.1. THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE I S PURELY LEGAL IN NATURE AND DO NOT REQUIRE ANY INVESTIGATION OF NEW FACTS. THUS, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF NTPC VS. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC), THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ADMITTED. SINCE W E HAVE DELETED THE PENALTY ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, WE DO NOT PROPOSE TO GO INT O THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/05/2 019. SD/- SD/- ( JES'K LH- 'KEKZ ) ( FOT; IKY JKWO (RAMESH C. SHARMA ) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 24/05/2019. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT-M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JA IPUR. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 931/JP/2018) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 10 ITA NO. 931/JP/2018. M/S. R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR.