DY CIT - 26(1), MUMBAI vs M/S. LAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MUMBAI

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH&

For Appellant: Mr Mehul Jain, Sr AR

For Respondent: Shri. Reepal G Tralshawala, Mr Mehul Jain, Sr AR

Hearing: 24/11/2021Pronounced: 26/11/2021

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): These appeals in 472/Mum/2021 for A.Yrs.2013-14 & 2012-13 respectively arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)- 42, Mumbai/10026/2019-20 & CIT(A)-42, Mumbai/10025/2019-20 respectively dated 20/01/2020 (ld. CIT(A) in short) in the matter of imposition of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act).

The only issue to be decided in these appeals of the Revenue is that whether the concealment penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act would survive when the quantum addition has been deleted by the Tribunal vide order dated 21/11/2019. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had taken due cognizance of the fact that the quantum addition has been deleted by this Tribunal and on that ground, he has held that no penalty would survive. In these circumstances, we do not deem it fit to narrate the entire facts of the case and basis for making addition which inturn consequentially had been subjected to levy for penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Once, the quantum addition is deleted by this Tribunal which fact is also accepted by the Revenue, then, the levy of concealment penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act would have no legs to stand. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) deleting the penalty for both the years. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed.

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on 26/ 11 /2021 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.

DY CIT - 26(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. LAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MUMBAI