ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2 , CHENNAI V. R PANNERSELVAM, CHENNAI

MA 132/CHNY/2019

AI Insights

The case involves the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3), Chennai, as the petitioner, and Shri R. Panneerselvam, the respondent, concerning the assessment years 2003-04, 2005-06, 2006-07, and 2007-08. The Revenue filed four Miscellaneous Petitions challenging the Tribunal's earlier decision which quashed the penalty notices issued under sections 274 and 271 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal's decision was based on the precedents that the notices were vague and thus invalid. The Department argued that the Tribunal did not follow the decision of the Coordinate Benches in a similar case. However, the Tribunal found no mistake in its original order and dismissed the MPs, affirming the application of the legal principles established in the cited High Court and Supreme Court judgments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 135271 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-06-2019
• Other Referred Cases: ITO v. S. Anandalakshmi, CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory, CIT v. SSA's Emerald Meadows
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c); 274; 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member M.P. Nos.129, 130, 131 & 132/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. Nos.789, 790, 791 & 792/Chny/2018] Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3), Chennai. Vs. Shri R. Panneerselvam, No. 43, Sarangapani Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN:AAGPP5343K] (Petitioner) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) Petitioner by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Tarun, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 17.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The Revenue has filed four Miscellaneous Petitions against the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. Nos. 789, 790, 791 & 792/Chny/ 2018 dated 23.01.2019 relevant to the assessment years 2003-04, 2005- 06, 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. DR relied on the petitions and submitted that while adjudicating appeals filed by the assessee, the Tribunal has quashed the notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] without following the decision of the Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal in ITA No. 1948/Mds/2016 dated M.P. Nos.129, 130, 131 & 132/Chny/19 2 17.10.2017 in the case of ITO v. S. Anandalakshmi is a mistake apparent on record and prayed to rectify the mistake under section 254(2) of the Act. 3. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal, by following the judgement of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 and that of CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows in ITA No. 380/2015 dated 23.11.2015, decided that the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act could not be sustained since notice issued to the assessee under section 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act was vague. It was further submission that the judgement of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (supra) has been duly affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CC No. 11485 of 2017 dated 05.08.2016 and prayed that the MPs filed by the Revenue should be dismissed. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the petition filed by the assessee and gone through the order of the Tribunal. While adjudicating the appeals of the assessee, the Tribunal has considered the validity of the notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act, which goes to the root of the jurisdiction to levy a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the M.P. Nos.129, 130, 131 & 132/Chny/19 3 Act, By following the judgement of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of SSA’s Emerald Meadows (supra), wherein, its own judgement in the case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) has been relied upon and moreover, the judgement of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (supra) has been indirectly affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the Tribunal has set aside the penalty levied on the assessees for the impugned assessment years. Thus, we find no mistake apparent in the order passed by the Tribunal dated 23.01.2019. 5. In the result, all the MPs filed by the Department are dismissed. Order pronounced on 17 th February, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (G. MANJUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 17.02.2023 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 6. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.