ASTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.6 , Nagpur V. SHRI GAJANAN HARISHCHANDRA BAGWE, Nagpur

MA 06/NAG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5781 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AGNESH P THOMAS
• Assessee Lawyers: S C THAKUR
• Section: 271(1)(c); 22; 2

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH, NAGPUR (AT E-COURT, PUNE) BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM . / MA NO.06/NAG/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.409 & 410/NAG/2014) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 ACIT, CIRCLE-6, NAGPUR. ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. SHRI GAJANAN HARISHCHANDRA BAGWE, 13, JAGNADE CHOWK, NANDANWAN, NAGPUR-440009. PAN : ABRPB9253E / RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SMT. AGNESH P. THOMAS ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. C. THAKUR / DATE OF HEARING : 17.01.2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.01.2020 / ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ARISES FROM THE REVENUES APPEAL IN ITA NOS.409 & 410/NAG/2014 VIDE ORDER DATED 22.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE CONTENDED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE RELATING TO CONCEALMENT PENALTY, SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DISMISSED CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE TRIBUNAL IN THE FIRST ROUND OF PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE, IT WAS ERRONEOUS ON THE PART OF THE TRIBUNAL IN DECIDING THAT NO ADDITION REMAINED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ON WHICH THE PENALTY CAN BE LEVIED. FURTHER, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE IS MERELY RELIED ON THE CONTENTS OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL DELETED THE SAID ADDITION IN THE SECOND ROUND . 2 MA NO.06/NAG/2018 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY JUSTIFIED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND PRAYED FOR DISMISSING THE MA OF THE REVENUE. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSING THE CONTENTS OF MA PETITION, WE FIND IT IS AN ADMITTED POSITION FROM THE CONTENTS OF PARA 11 OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA) AND THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE THAT, IF THE ADDITIONS ARE CONFIRMED IN THE FIRST ROUND AND EVENTUALLY DELETED IN THE SECOND ROUND BY THE TRIBUNAL, THE PENALTY IS NOT LEVIABLE. CONSIDERING THE SAME, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE TRIBUNALS FINDING IN PARA 11 IS FAIR AND REASONABLE AND WHEN THERE IS ADDITIONS ON MERIT ARE DELETED, EVENTUALLY, THE PENALTY SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. WHEN THE ADDITIONS ON MERITS ARE DELETED, THE PENALTY HAS NO LEGS TO STAND. THEREFORE, THE MA OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 22 ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2020. SD/- SD/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 22 ND JANUARY, 2020. SUJEET / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE.