Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G” BENCH NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI N.K. SAINI & SHRI KULDIP SINGH
PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The Appellant, ACIT Circle-3 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Revenue’) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 18.5.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi, affirming the penalty order dated 18.5.2016 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), qua the assessment year 2007-08 on the grounds inter alia that:- “1. The order of Ld. CIT (A) is not correct in law and on facts.
On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty on the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- based on the statements given by Mr. Bipin B.
Shah and Mr. Anand Shukla during the course of search on 28.02.2007. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty on the addition of Rs.7,25,000/- on account of seized cash. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”
2. Briefly stated the facts necessary are on the basis of assessment order dated 29.12.2009 completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, assessing that total income at Rs. 25,67,24,528/-, the penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1)(c). However, the Learned CIT(Appeals) restricted the addition made vide assessment order passed u/s 143(3) to Rs. 150,00,000/- and also upheld the addition of Rs. 7,25,000/- on account of unexplained cash seized during the search operation.
3. Penalty proceedings have been initiated by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) on the ground that the assessee has concealed the particulars of its true income and furnished inaccurate particulars of income. However, the Assessing Officer being dissatisfied with the submission made by the assessee imposed penalty to the tune of Rs. 5,344,928/-. 4. The assessee carried the matter before the Learned CIT(Appeals) by way of filing the appeal who has deleted the penalty by allowing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal.
We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case.
6. At the very outset, it is brought to our notice that in the quantum proceedings the addition sustained by the Learned CIT(Appeals) to the tune of Rs. 1.50 crore and Rs. 7.25 lakh has since been deleted by the Tribunal, Delhi “G” Bench vide order dated 16.12.2015 in ITA Nos. 1850,1911/D/2013. We are of the considered view that when the additions of Rs. 1.50 crore and Rs. 7.25 lacs, on the basis of which penalty of Rs. 53,44,928/- has been imposed has not sustained having been deleted by the Tribunal the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer also cannot survive. So finding no illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the Learned CIT(Appeals), present appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed.
In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 07.11.2017.