KRISHAN DEV VERMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD -1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Jी राठाैड+ कमलेश जयन्तभाइर्] लेखा सदस्य एव Jी नरेन्द्र कुमार] न्यायिक सदस्य के सम{ा
BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM
आयकर अपील सं-@प्ज्A छव. 432/Jच्त्/2022
निधर्ारण वषर्@Aेेमेेउमदज ल्मंत रू 2014-15
डत. ज्ञतपेींद क्मअ टमतउं
801,
Rama
Krishana
Aचंतजउमदजेए
Ward-1(4),
Jaipur.
स्थायीलेखा सं-@जीआइर्आर सं-@च्Aछ/ह्प्त् छव.रू AठJच्ट9447फ
अपीलाथीर्@Aचचमससंदज
प्रत्यथीर्@त्मेचवदकमदज
निधर्ारिती की ओर से@Aेेमेेमम इल रू ैी. त्वींद ैवहंदपए ब्.A.
राजस्व की ओर से@त्मअमदनम इलरू ैी. ह्ंनजंउ ैपदही ब्ीवनकींतलए Jब्प्ज्-क्त्
सुनवाइर् की तारीख@क्ंजम वf Hमंतपदह
: 08 /01/2025
उदघाेषणा की तारीख@क्ंजम वf च्तवदवनदबमउमदजरू 08/01/2025
आदेश@Oत्क्म्त्
च्म्त्रू छंतपदकमत ज्ञनउंतए Jनकपबपंस डमउइमतए
By way of present appeal, the assessee has challenged order dated
15.10.2022, u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), passed by Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi.
Matter pertains to assessment year 2014-15. 2
2. The assessee was in appeal before Learned CIT(A), feeling aggrieved by penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer, u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, whereby penalty of Rs. 3,18,747/- was levied against him. Said penalty was levied on the ground that the assessee had concealed particulars of his income by way of non disclosure of the true income.
It may be mentioned here that the quantum proceedings were also conducted, as regards the same assessment year 2014-15 and the same led to assessment order, whereby total income of the assessee was calculated at Rs. 16,44,154/-, due to two additions i.e. one u/s 68 of the Act, and the other because of disallowance of commission paid on a sum of Rs. 12,25,080/-.
As is available from the penalty order, the assessee filed an appeal before Learned CIT(A) challenging the quantum assessment, and the said appeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 29.03.2019, confirming the ंइवअम जूव ंककपजपवदे.
3
As noticed above, the penalty order were also challenged by the assessee by way of appeal, but Learned CIT(A), NFAC has dismissed the ेंउम अपकम पउचनहदमक वतकमत.
5. During pendency of this appeal, Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted an application alleging therein that the assessee has filed Form
No. 1 before the competent authority, under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme,
2024, thereby opting to settle the quantum assessment.
Ld. AR for the appellant has further submitted that the present appeal arises out of the penalty order, pertaining to the same assessment order, and as such the appellant is going to submit application under Vivad Se
Vishwas Scheme, 2024, for settlement, as regards the penalty order as well.
Ultimately, Ld. AR for the appellant has urged that the present appeal be dismissed as having been withdrawn, with liberty to get the same revived in case no settlement is arrived at under the said scheme-2024. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, prayer of Ld. AR for the appellant for withdrawal of this appeal is allowed, and this appeal is hereby dismissed, as having been withdrawn, with liberty that in case no settlement is arrived at between the parties as regards subject matter of the 4
Order pronounced in the open court on 08/01/2025. ¼राठाैड+ कमलेश जयन्तभाइर् ½
¼ujsUnz dqekj½
(RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI)
(NARINDER KUMAR)
लेखा सदस्य @Aबबवनदजंदज डमउइमत न्यायिक सदस्य@Jनकपबपंस डमउइमत
ज्ायपुर@Jंपचनत
fnukad@Dated:- 08/01/2025
*Santosh
आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू
1. ज्ीम Aचचमससंदज- डत. ज्ञतपेींद क्मअ टमतउंए Jंपचनत.
2. प्रत्यथीर्@ ज्ीम त्मेचवदकमदज- प्ज्Oए Wंतक-1(4द्वए Jंपचनत.
3. आयकर आयुक्त@ ज्ीम सक ब्प्ज्
4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत
5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 432/JPR/2022)
आदेशानुसार@ ठल वतकमतए
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत