Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI WASEEM AHMED
आदेश / O R D E R
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–II, Baroda [CIT(A) in short] vide appeal no.CAB/II-439/13-14 dated 11.11.2014 arising in the assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward- 2(1), under s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 23.11.2011 and penalty order passed by the ACIT, Circle-2(1) u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 19/03/2014 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10.
ITA No.625/Ahd/2015 DCIT vs.M/s.Kirti Construction Asst.Year - 2009-10
- 2 - 2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee brought to our notice that the quantum addition in respect of which the penalty was levied u/s 271(1) of the Act has been deleted by this Hon’ble Tribunal in ITA No. 2434/Ahd/2012 & others for AY 2009-10 & others vide order dated 13/11/2014. Accordingly, the Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not sustainable. The Ld.AR vehemently supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A).
On the other hand, the Ld.DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act require to levy the penalty either on account of concealment of the income or inaccurate particulars of income. As in the case on hand, the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income has been deleted by the ITAT in own case of the assessee (supra). Therefore, we hold that the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not sustainable.
4.1. As the quantum addition has already been deleted, therefore, the penalty imposed on such addition will not survive. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to disturb the findings of the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
ITA No.625/Ahd/2015 DCIT vs.M/s.Kirti Construction Asst.Year - 2009-10
- 3 - 5. In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 01/02/2019
Sd/- Sd/- ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( WASEEM AHMED ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 01/02/2019 ट�.सी.नायर, व.�न.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-II, Baroda �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 21.1.2019(dictation pad 5-pages attached at the end of this appeal-file) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 22.1.2019 3. Other Member… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S … 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement…… 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S…….1.2.19 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk…………………1.2.19 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order……………