Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JM & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आदेश / O R D E R
Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years [AY] 2003- 04 to 2005-06 contest the imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) as levied by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] and confirmed by Ld. first appellate authority. Since identical issues are involved, we dispose-off the same by way of this common order for the sake of convenience & brevity. & 2376/Mum/2017, AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 ITA Nos.2375-77/Mum/2017 Jaya Marketing Assessment Years-2003-04 to 2005-06 2. In AY 2003-04, the assessee being resident firm has been assessed u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 on 31/12/2009 after quantum additions of Rs.746.35 Lacs on account of low Gross Profit declared by the assessee. Consequently, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) were initiated in the quantum assessment order for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income. The assessee has been saddled with impugned penalty of Rs.274.28 Lacs against the same vide penalty order dated 21/10/2011 which, upon confirmation by Ld. first appellate authority on 07/12/2016, is under appeal before us. The amount of penalty imposed for AY 2004-05, against similar addition, stands at Rs.307.60 Lacs which has also been confirmed by Ld. first appellate authority vide appellate order dated 07/12/2016.
The Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee [AR], Shri Nitesh Joshi, at the outset, drew our attention to the fact that the assessee contested the quantum additions with success before this Tribunal vide 6474-75/Mum/2011 order dated 24/08/2017 wherein the quantum additions have been deleted for AYs 2003-04 & 2004-05 and therefore, the impugned penalty do not survive. The copy of the cited order has been placed before us. The Ld. DR could not controvert the aforesaid fact but submitted that the same has not yet attained finality.
Upon careful consideration of cited order, we find that the quantum additions for both the years have been deleted by the Tribunal in the following manner:- 51. In the A.Y. 2003-04 and 2004-05 AO had after reopening the assessment and rejected the books of accounts and made trading addition based on the assessment framed for A.Y.2005-06. Following the reasoning given hereinabove, we do not find any justification for rejection of books of accounts and addition so ITA Nos.2375-77/Mum/2017 Jaya Marketing Assessment Years-2003-04 to 2005-06 made by applying the G.P. rate so arrived at in A.Y.2005-06. Accordingly additions made in both the years are deleted.