Shri Prahladbhai Nathalal Patel, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

ITSSA 786/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9662 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-11-2013
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 16-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BATHEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: R B RATHI

Judgement Text

, , , , A, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, A BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ #$ #$ #$ %& %& %& %& , , , , &' ( & ' &' ( & ' &' ( & ' &' ( & ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND TEJ RAM MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) IT(SS)A NO.786/AHD/2010 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2003-2004] SHRI PRAHLADBHAI NATHALAL PATEL C/O. R.B. RATHI & CO. 35, NEW CLOTH MARKET AHMEDABAD. PAN : ABIPP 0091 P /VS. ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE MEHSANA. ( (( (*+ *+ *+ *+ / APPELLANT) ( (( (,-*+ ,-*+ ,-*+ ,-*+ / RESPONDENT) .% / 0 &/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI R.B. RATHI ( / 0 &/ REVENUE BY : SHRI O.P. BATHEJA, SR.DR 2 / %3'/ DATE OF HEARING : 11 TH NOVEMBER, 2013. 456 / %3'/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-12-2013 &7 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004 IS DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR DATED 13.8.200 6. IT(SS)A NO.786/AHD/2010 -2 2. THE ONLY GROUND OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER: 1. THE AUTHORITY BELOW HAVE ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS BY IMPOSING THE PENALTY OF ` 4,71,603/-. WHEN IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACT THAT QUANTUM APPEAL IS PENDI NG BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT IN THE QUANTUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT ASS ESSMENT YEAR, THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE ISSUE OF ADDITION TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH VIDE THEIR ORD ER DATED 16.9.2011 IN ITA NO.804/AHD/2008, AND THEREFORE, TH E PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER S ECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT MAY ALSO RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). THE LEARNED DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AO A ND THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PE RUSED THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A). WE FIND THAT THE IN THE QUAN TUM APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 16.9.2011 IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REL EVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004 IN ITA NO.804/AHD/008 HAS RESTORED THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE QUANTUM APP EAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, IT SHALL BE JUSTIFIED TO RESTORE THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US REGARDING VALIDITY OF THE PENALTY IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT TO THE F ILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE DE NOVO ON MERITS AFTER ALLOWING IT(SS)A NO.786/AHD/2010 -3 REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO BOTH THE PARTI ES. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( %& %& %& %& / TEJ RAM MEENA) &' ( &' ( &' ( &' ( /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD