DCIT, Jaipur V. RAUNAQ FINANCE LTD.,

MA 35/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3769 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 13-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM M.A. NO. 35/JP/2015 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 120/JP/2010) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S RAUNAQ FINANCE LTD., 418, SHALMAR COMPLEX, CHURCH ROAD, JAIPUR. NOW L-77, LAJPAT NAGAR, NEW DELHI. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAACR 9929 A VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI KAILASH MANGAL (JCIT). FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : NONE. LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 04/12/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/12/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: R.P. TOLANI, JM. THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THIS M.A. WHICH ARISES FROM THE ORDER DATED 31/10/2014 OF THIS BENCH OF ITAT, JAIPUR IN IT A NO. 120/JP/2010, M.A. 35/JP/2015 DCIT VS. M/S RAUNAQ FINANCE LTD. 2 DISMISSING THE REVENUE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DELETING PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C). 2. IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, THE REVENUE CONTENDS THAT THE FOLLOWING MISTAKE IS APPARENT FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ITAT :- ONE OF THE CONTENTION OF THE COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT IS THAT PARA 6.4 OF THE ORDER OF THE ITAT, THE MAJOR COMPONENT OF INTEREST WHICH IS SUBJECT MATTER OF CHALLENGE BEFORE THE ITAT BUT NO R EFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS FINDINGS RECORDED IN PAR A 6.4 LD. DR REFERS TO THIS MISTAKE AND CONTENDS THAT, T HE ABOVE MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IS APPARENT AND REC TIFIABLE U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE C OMPANY HAS GONE INTO LIQUIDATION. 4. THE LD DR IS HEARD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THE ITAT HAS DISMISSED THE REVENUES APPE AL CHALLENGING DELETION OF PENALTY BY FOLLOWING THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS 322 ITR 1 58 BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: M.A. 35/JP/2015 DCIT VS. M/S RAUNAQ FINANCE LTD. 3 6.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATER IALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT ALL THE PARTICULA RS ABOUT THE CLAIM U/S 35D AND TRAVELLING EXPENSES WERE FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE HON'B LE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS (SUPRA) HAS CLEARLY HELD THAT IF THE RELEVANT PARTI CULARS ARE FILED ALONGWITH THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE MERE FACT IS THAT AO DISALLOWED PART OF IT OR TOOK A DIFFERENT VIEW WILL NOT MAKE AMENABLE TO PENALTY U/S 271(1)( C) OF THE ACT. THUS IN VIEW THEREOF, THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN TH E CASE OF CIT VS RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS (SUPRA) IS SQUARE LY APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE'S CASE. HENCE, WE FIND N O INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS UPHELD. 7.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 6. BESIDES THE ISSUE ABOUT DELETION OF PENALTY QUA INTEREST AS RAISED BY REVENUE IN MA WAS DULY CONSIDERED BY THE ITAT WHIL E DEALING WITH THE PARA 6.3. THUS THE ISSUE OF PENALTY QUA INTEREST HAS BEEN CONSIDERED. THEREAFTER, THE ENTIRE ORDER OF THE LD C IT(A) HAS BEEN UPHELD BY ITAT AS NO INFIRMITY WAS FOUND THEREIN AND IN VIEW OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DECISION THE SAME WAS UPHELD. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ISSUE OF INTEREST WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS NOT BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD BESIDES THE APPLICATION IN EFFECT SINCE REVIEW OF ITAT ORDER, WHICH IS NOT PERMIS SIBLE U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT. SINCE THE MISTAKE POINTED OUT ABOVE IS NOT APPARENT FROM THE M.A. 35/JP/2015 DCIT VS. M/S RAUNAQ FINANCE LTD. 4 RECORD AND IT IS CLEAR THAT BY THIS M.A., REVENUE S EEKS REVIEW OF ITAT ORDER, THE SAME IS NOT PERMISSIBLE U/S 252(2) OF TH E ACT. ACCORDINGLY, M.A. OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THIS M.A. OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/12/2015. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (T.R. MEENA) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 04 TH DECEMBER, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- M/S RAUNAQ FINANCE LTD., NEW DELHI. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (M.A. NO. 35/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR