Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकर अपील सं./ (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2011-12) DCIT M/s. Indus Mobile Distribution Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Central Circle-1(1), No.281, TTK Road, Alwarpet, / Vs. Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCI-6304-D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओरसे/ Assessee by : Shri Shrenik Chorddia (C.A) – Ld. AR ��थ� की ओरसे/Revenue by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19-07-2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19-07-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by Revenue for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 27.12.2021 deleting penalty of Rs.180 Lacs as levied by Ld. AO vide penalty order dated 30.03.2019. The grounds taken by the Revenue are as under:
The order of the Id. Commissioner of IT. (Appeals) is erroneous on facts of the case and in law. 2.1. The Id. CIT(A) erred in directing the assessing officer to delete the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of Rs.1.80 crores, on the ground that the quantum additions 2 - relating to the levy of penalty has been deleted and the penalty has no legs to stand. 2.2. It is submitted that appeal is being preferred before the Hon'ble Madras High Court against the Hon'ble Chennai ITATs order in dated 16.09.2021, wherein, the quantum additions relating to levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) were deleted. 3. For these grounds and any other ground including amendment of grounds that may be raised during the course of the appeal proceedings, the order of Id. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.
During the course of hearing, it emerges that the quantum additions against which penalty has been levied, has been deleted by Tribunal and taking note of the same, Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the impugned penalty. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the revenue is in further appeal before Hon’ble High Court of Madras against the quantum order of the Tribunal. 3. We find that the assessee was saddled with various auditions aggregating to Rs.500.98 Lacs on account of depreciation, advertisement and professional fees. The same has already been enumerated in opening paragraph of penalty order dated 30.03.2019. The Ld. AO levied impugned penalty of Rs.180 Lacs since the quantum additions were confirmed in the first appellate order. However, during appellate penalty proceedings, it transpired that the penalty stood deleted by Tribunal vide ITA No.915/Chny/2019 order dated 16.09.2021. Accordingly, it was held by Ld. CIT(A) that the penalty would have no legs to stand and penalty has become infructuous. Thus the impugned penalty was deleted. It was further held that in case any further appellate forum reverses the decision on quantum, it was open for AO to take action on penalty as per Sec. 275(1A) of the Act. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us.
3 - 4. Before us, the position as noted by Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order remain undisturbed. The Tribunal order deleting quantum addition still stand. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. 5. The appeal stand dismissed. Order pronounced on 19th July, 2022.