The ACIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad V. Shri Ravindra Maghiram Agrawal, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 461/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0466 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-12-2014
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B KULSHRESHTA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAIN I , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T (SS) A NO . 460, 461 & 462 /AHD/20 1 1 A. Y S . 200 0 - 01 , 200 1 - 0 2 & 200 4 - 0 5 ACIT, CIRCLE 1(4), AHMEDABAD. VS RAVINDRA MAGHI RAM AGRAWAL, 70, VASANT BAHAR COLONY BHOPAL, AHMEDABAD PAN: ACIPA 6398M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI B. KULSHRESHTA, SR. DR. ASSESSEE(S) BY : MS. URVASHI SHODHAN, A.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 10 / 1 2/2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12 / 12 /201 4 / O R D E R PER SHRI N.S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S OF THE C I T(A) - V I, AHMEDABAD DATED 13.05.2011 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 200 0 - 0 1 , 200 1 - 0 2 & 200 4 - 0 5 . 2. IN ALL THESE APPEALS THE COMMON GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.1,31,70,300/ - IN A SSESSMENT YEAR 2000 - 01, RS.14,84,750/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001 - 02 AND RS.52,51,000/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05. I T (SS) A NOS. 460, 461 & 462 /AHD/201 1 ACIT , CIRCLE - 1(4) AHMEDABAD VS. RAVINDRA MAGHIRAM AGRAWAL . FOR A.Y S . 200 0 - 0 1 , 200 1 - 02 & 200 4 - 0 5 - 2 - 3 . THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT MADE U/S.153 A (B) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE IT ACT AN ADDITION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT OF RS.3,99,10,000/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000 - 01, RS.42,30,000/ - IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001 - 02 AND RS.1,56,00,000/ - IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05. 4 . IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, T HE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. T HE ASSESSEE FILED A PPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) CONFIRM ING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THE TRIBUNAL VIDE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 28.01.2011 IN ITA NO . 1725/AHD/2008, ETC., DELETED THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT S . 5 . THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER PASSING OF THE ORDERS BY CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT , LEVIED PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR CONCEALM ENT OF INCOME. THE SAID PENAL TY LEVIED WAS RS.1,31,70,300/ - IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000 - 01, RS.14,84,750/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001 - 02 AND RS.52,51,000/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A) D ELETED THE PENALTY IN ALL THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION ON THE GROUND THAT THE ADDITION MADE ON WHICH THE PENALTY WAS LEVIED WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 28.01.2011. 6. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE REVENUE IS UNDER APPE AL BEFORE US. I T (SS) A NOS. 460, 461 & 462 /AHD/201 1 ACIT , CIRCLE - 1(4) AHMEDABAD VS. RAVINDRA MAGHIRAM AGRAWAL . FOR A.Y S . 200 0 - 0 1 , 200 1 - 02 & 200 4 - 0 5 - 3 - 7 . WE FIND THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE PENALTY OF RS. RS.1,31,70,300/ - IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000 - 01, RS.14,84,750/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001 - 02 AND RS.52,51,000/ - IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 LEVIED BY THE AO U/S.271(1)(C) WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ADDITION ON WHICH THE PENALTY WAS LEVIED WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 28.01.2011 . 8. WE FIND THAT THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF K.C. BUILDERS VS. ACIT (2004) 265 ITR 562 (SC) HAS HELD THAT WHER E ADDITIONS ARE MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY FOR CONCEALMENT IS LEVIED, ARE DELETED, THERE REMAINS NO BA S IS AT ALL FOR LEVYING PENALTY FOR CONCEALMENT. NO PENALTY WOULD SURVIVE IF ADDITION DID NOT SURVIVE. THUS, WE FIND NO INF IRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN DELETING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IN ALL THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. HENCE, WE DISMISS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN ALL THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S OF T HE REVENUE FOR ALL THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. SD/ - SD/ - ( KUL BHARAT ) ( N.S. SAINI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 12 / 12 /20 1 4 PRABHAT KR. KESARWANI , SR. P . S . / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE C IT(A) - III, AHMEDABAD I T (SS) A NOS. 460, 461 & 462 /AHD/201 1 ACIT , CIRCLE - 1(4) AHMEDABAD VS. RAVINDRA MAGHIRAM AGRAWAL . FOR A.Y S . 200 0 - 0 1 , 200 1 - 02 & 200 4 - 0 5 - 4 - 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDA BAD