DCIT, CIRCLE - 49(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PARTHA CHAKRABORTI, SALT LAKE CITY, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1473/KOL/2024
(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015)

DCIT, Circle-49(1), Kolkata
Vs Partha Chakraborti,
Uttarapan Building, Block-DS-
II & III, 2nd Floor, Ultadanga,
Kolkata-700054
PAN No. :ADQPC 5578 E

(अपीलधर्थी /Appellant)
..
(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Subhasis Ghosh & Shri S.
Bhattacharjee, Ars
रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Susanta Shah, Sr. DR
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing
: 01/05/2025
घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 01/05/2025

आदेश / O R D E R
Per Bench :

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated
12.03.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre
(NFAC), Delhi, passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-
24/1062475105(1), for the assessment year 2014-2015, thereby confirming the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act.
2. Shri Subhasis Ghosh & Shri S. Bhattacharjee, ARs appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Susanta Shah, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
3. At the outset, on perusal of the appeal record, we found that the appeal of the revenue is filed belatedly by 53 days. In this regard, the 2
revenue has filed an application dated 11.11.2024 stating sufficient reasons for condonation of delay, which in our opinion, is plausible one. Accordingly, the delay of 53 days in filing the appeal by the revenue is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
4. It was submitted by the ld Sr. DR that in the present case, the assessment came to be completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 26.12.2016, wherein a number of additions have been made. It was the submission that the matters reached to the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its order passed in ITA No.2585/Kol/2018, dated 06.09.2019, deleted the substantial portion of the additions. It was the submission that penalty order u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act came to be passed by the Assessing Officer on 28.03.2019 on the basis of the order of the ld. CIT(A) in quantum appeal confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that against the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee had filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) had taken cognizance of the order of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in quantum appeal passed in ITA
No.2585/Kol/2018, dated 06.09.2019 wherein most of the additions made by the Assessing Officer had been deleted. Consequently, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act by holding that the additions, per se, had been deleted in the quantum proceedings. There were certain additions which had been sustained by the Tribunal in respect of the donations and subscriptions, entertainment expenses, interest on refund, disallowances u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act and partly on bogus expenditure disallowance u/s.40A(3) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) had deleted
3
the penalty in its entirety. It was the submission that the quantum order of the Tribunal admittedly has been upheld by the Hon’ble Juri ictional High
Court of Calcutta but the revenue has preferred appeal before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court vide an SLP. It was the submission that the order of the ld.
CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, is liable to be reversed.
5. In reply, ld. AR drew our attention to the affidavit in opposition filed by the assessee. It was the submission that the main addition being in respect of the transactions with M/s Chakra Infrastructure Ltd. and other bogus loans from Disha Productions and Medial Pvt. Ltd. have been deleted by the Tribunal vide quantum order. Similarly, additions in regard to allegation of cash payment for disallowance of the business expenditure had been partly allowed by the Tribunal. It was the submission that the revenue has not provided any information regarding SLP filed by the revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It was the submission that as the Assessing Officer has also given effect to the order of the Tribunal and the additions have already been deleted, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be upheld.
6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the very foundation on which the penalty has been levied being the additions made u/s.68 of the Act in the assessment order, had already been deleted by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in the quantum proceedings in ITA
No.2585/Kl/2018, vide order dated 06.09.2019. As it is noticed that the ld.
4
CIT(A) has considered the fact that the quantum addition had been deleted by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the quantum appeal and on the additions not contested or partly sustained before the Tribunal, no penalty was leviable. Therefore, we find no error in the order of the ld. CIT(A) which calls for no interference. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the revenue.
7. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/05/2025. (RAKESH MISHRA) (GEORGE MATHAN)
लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER
कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 01/05/2025
Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.

आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

(