The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar V. M/s Prehari Protection System Pvt. Ltd, Kapurthala

MA 6/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5484 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 27

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER AND SH.N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A. NO. 06/(ASR)/2017 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A NO. 183/(ASR)/2016) ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAN: AAMPA1265F DY. CIT, CIRCLE-IV, JALANDHAR. VS. M/S. PREHARI PROTECTION SYSTEM PVT. LTD., JALLOW KHANNA, KAPURTHALA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN (DR) RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 12.05.2017 DATE OF PRONOU NCEMENT: 18.05.2017 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY RE VENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 01.08.2016 IN ITA N O. 183/(ASR)/2016. NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEV ER FROM THE RECORD, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE MATTER CAN BE DISPOSED OFF EV EN IN THE ABSENCE OF LD. AR; THEREFORE, THE LD. DR WAS DIRECTED TO PROCE ED WITH HIS ARGUMENTS. 2. THE LD. DR, AT THE OUTSET INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY REVENUE AND SUBMITTED THAT HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAD NOT DISPOSED OFF SECOND GROUND AND THEREFORE, THIS AMOU NTS TO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WHICH NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. 3. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT F ILED VOUCHERS FOR FOREIGN TRAVELING EXPENSES AND FOR PROJECT EXPENSES AND THEREFORE, THE MA NO. 06/(ASR)/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 183/(AS R)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2011-12 2 ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITION AND IT WAS WRONG ON THE PART OF LD. CIT(A) TO HOLD THAT PENALTY CANNOT BE I MPOSED UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND HAVE GONE THROUGH T HE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT HON'BLE TRIBUNAL VI DE ORDER DATED 01.08.2016 HAD DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL FILED BY REV ENUE AND IN ITS ORDER, IT HAS HELD TO HAVE FOUND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAS IN FACT DISPOSED OFF GROUND NO . 2 ONLY AS GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL. THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT AN Y DISALLOWANCE MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER WILL NOT ITSELF AMOUNT TO FURN ISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAD PLAC ED RELIANCE ON PETRO PRODUCTS LTD. REPORTED IN 322 ITR 158 (SC). THE ORD ER OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS CLEARLY STATES THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED CERTAIN EXPENDITURE AND WHICH CLAIM WAS NOT ACCEPTED OR WAS NOT ACCEPTA BLE TO THE REVENUE, THAT BY ITSELF WOULD NOT ATTRACT THE PENALTY U/S 27 1(1) (C) OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, THE ARGUMENT OF LD. DR THAT GROUND NO. 2 HAS NOT BEEN DISPOSED OFF DO NOT HOLD IN FORCE. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION FILED BY REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.05. 2017. SD/- SD/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 18/05/2017 MA NO. 06/(ASR)/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 183/(AS R)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2011-12 3 GP/SR./PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER