Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI
ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM: (A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hisar [Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 19.12.2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12. Grounds of appeal taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under:
“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 holding that addition made u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act, in respect of Municipal Taxes does not fall under the purview of furnishing of inaccurate particulars.
On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the version that expenses are not debited in profit and loss account as such not disallowable u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act and accordingly not covered within ambit of inaccurate particulars of income, whereas in quantum appeal of the assessee, on the issue of Municipal Tax the additions made by the AO has been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) in appeal No 194/HSR/14-15 dated 31.03.2016.
The appellant craves leave to add, or amend the grounds before the appeal is heard and disposed off.”
(B) During the appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT”, for short) a consolidated paper book has been filed from the assessee’s side, containing the following particulars in respect of this appeal:
S. No. Particulars
Copy of ITAT Quantum Order dated 19.02.2020 for AY 2008-09 & 2011-12 in & 3413/Del/16 2. Copy of ITAT Penalty U/s 271(1)(c) order dated 10.08.2017 for AY 2005-06 3. Copy of ITAT Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) order dated 28.02.2022 for AYs 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2006-07 (B.1) On perusal of records, we find from the records, that Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, amounting to Rs.6,86,88,573/-, in respect of additions totaling Rs.20,67,84,296/-. These additions totaling aforesaid amount of Rs.20,67,84,296/- already stand deleted by ITAT vide aforesaid order dated 19.02.2020 of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi in & 3413/Del/2016.
(B.1.1) Vide aforesaid impugned order dated 19.12.2018; the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the aforesaid penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, amounting to Rs.6,86,88,573/- for Assessment Year 2011-12. The present appeal before us has been filed by Revenue against the impugned appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A) whereby he deleted the penalty.
(B.1.2) At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer has no legs to stand, because the corresponding quantum additions amounting to Rs.20,67,84,296/- for Assessment Year 2011-12 stand already deleted by Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi vide aforesaid order dated 19.02.2020. Therefore, he submitted, the present appeal filed by the Department against impugned appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A) should be dismissed.
(B.2) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative) for Revenue relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. However, she did not dispute the fact that quantum additions in respect of which penalty was levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2011- 12; stand already deleted by order of Co-ordinate Bench, Delhi vide aforesaid order dated 19.02.2020.
(B.2.1) As the quantum additions in respect of which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act has been levied by the Assessing Officer, stand already deleted by order of Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT, Delhi; we are in agreement with the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for assessee, that the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1) (c) of Income Tax Act have no legs to stand; and that the Departmental appeal against the impugned appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be dismissed. We take support from the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C. Builders vs. ACIT 135 Taxman 461 (SC). In view of the foregoing, the present appeal by Revenue is hereby dismissed.
(F) In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed.
This order was already pronounced orally on 3rd March, 2022 in Open Court, in the presence of representatives of both sides, after conclusion of the hearing. Now this order in writing is signed today on 03.03.2022.