LINKLATERS, MUMBAI V. ADIT - 3(2), MUMBAI

MA 254/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5131 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: L
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 29-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M C OMININGSHENJ

Judgement Text

, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI L BENCH BEFORE S/SH. RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & RAM LAL NEGI,JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO.254/MUM/2016 ( ARISING OUT OF /.ITA NO.7082/MUM/2005, /ASSESSMENT YEAR-1997-98 ) LINKLATERS (FORMERLY LINKLATERS & PAINES) C/O., C.C. CHOKSHI & CO. 12, ANNIE BESANT ROAD, WORLI MUMBAI-400 018. PAN:AABFL 2160 M VS. ADIT-(IT)-3(2) SCINDIA HOUSE, ROOM NO.132 1 ST FLOOR, N.M. ROAD MUMBAI-400 038. ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NIRAJ SHETH / REVENUE BY : SHRI M.C. OMININGSHEN-JCIT-DR / DATE OF HEARING : 09.12.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.12.2016 , 1961 1961 1961 1961 254 254 254 254( (( (1 11 1) )) ) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA A.M. - VIDE ITS APPLICATION,DATED 29.07.2016 THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, DATED 04.02.2016, CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS WERE TO BE MADE,THAT DURING THE HEARING BEFORE THE BENCH THE IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT NO PENALTY PROCEE DINGS WERE INITIATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER,DATED 30/03/2000,PASSED U/S.143(3)OF THE ACT, THAT THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED U/S. 271(1)(C) WAS WITHOUT JURISDICTION,THAT THE AR HAD ADMITTED T HAT THE ISSUE OF NOT INITIATING THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS IN THE ASSESSMENT WAS NOT AGITATED BEFO RE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES,THAT A REQUEST WAS MADE TO INCLUDE THE SUBMISSION FOR KEEPING THE ISSU E ALIVE, THAT THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAD RELIED ON RULE 27 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RUL ES, THAT WHILE ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT MENTION THE SUBMISSIONS MADE DURIN G THE COURSE OF HEARING. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US THE AR REITE RATED THE CONTENTS OF THE APPLICATION AND STATED THAT A CORRIGENDUM MAY BE ISSUED TO KEEP THE ISSUE ALIVE IN CASE OF ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENT.THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE LEFT TH E ISSUE TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BENCH. 3. WE HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE BEFORE US.WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RAISED THE ISSUE OF NOT INITIATING THE PENALTY IN THE ASSESSME NT ORDER BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES,THAT THE BENCH HAD SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE QUESTION IN THAT R EGARD,THAT REFERRING TO RULE 27 OF THE TRIBUNAL MA254/M/16,AY.96-97-LINKLATERS(LLP) 2 RULES,1963 THE AR STATED THAT CONTENTION MAY BE REC ORDED TO KEEP THE ISSUE OPEN.CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE,WE ARE AMENDING OUR ORDER BY INSERTING PARA-8 AFTER PARAGRAPH 7 OF OUR ORDER DATED 4.2.2016.IT WO ULD READ AS UNDER 8.WE HAVE DECIDED THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF PENALTY IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE.THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAS RELIED UPON RULE 27 OF THE I.T. RULES,1963 AND HAS REQUESTED TO INCORPORATE THE ARGUMENT THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT INIT IATED IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3)OF THE ACT.THE ISSUE IS LEFT OPEN . ACCORDINGLY,MA FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED TO THAT EXTENT AND OUR ORDER STANDS MODIFIED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9 TH ,DECEMBER, 2016. 09 , 2016 SD/- SD/- ( /RAM LAL NEGI) ( / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /MUMBAI, /DATE:09.12.2016 . . . .. . JV.SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR L BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI.