DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ADITYA LANDCON PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that income was assessed u/s 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, vide Assessment order dated 29/3/2014 at Rs. 40,00,000/-. Addition was made on account of sale proceeds of Malba of building sold to Mr. Abdul Rahman which was credited to the land and building account. The Assessing Officer treated the same as cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and had credited the following extra demands:-

The Ld. AR submitted that the Revenue’s appeal against order of CIT(A) in quantum has already been dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 2/8/2018 being on account of low tax effect. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Assessing Officer levied the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) vide order dated 29/9/2014 before the order of CIT(A) u/s 143(3) thereby treating the amount of Rs. 40 lacs as concealed income at Rs. 20,88,840/- (wrongly adopted the extra demand credited on assessment as taxed on concealed income, in-fact extra tax was only Rs. 12,36,000/-. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty. The Ld. AR submitted that actual tax on the final income assessed was Rs.98,880/- for the income of Rs.3,20,000/-. However, after the CIT(A)’s order, the basis of nature of amount of Rs. 40 lacs changed and hence the levy of penalty on old basis by Assessing Officer is not in accordance with law. The Ld. AR relied upon decision of the Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Lakdhir Lal Ji 85 ITR 77.

The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the penalty but could not controvert the fact that the appeal filed by the Revenue is having low tax effect as per Circular dated 03 of 2018 dated 11th July, 2018.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The CIT(A) has rightly deleted the penalty and the appeal of the Revenue is also coming under the purview of low tax effect. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

In result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.