ASST CIT 2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MILTON PLASTICS LTD, MUMBAI

सुनवाई क� तार�ख / : 18.10.2017 Date of Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख / : 01.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-5, Mumbai dated 31.03.2015 and pertains to assessment year 2008-09.

read as under:

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in cancelling the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c), without appreciating that assessee had made 78% of its sales to associates concerns at (A.Y. 2008-09) Asst. CIT vs. M/s. Milton Plastics Ltd. a discount of 12% with sole motive of evading payment of tax particularly because the associate concern was eligible for deduction u/s. 80-IB of the Act.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in cancelling the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c), without appreciating the fact that the quantum addition on account of selling goods to its associates concern at a discount of 12% had been upheld by the ld. CIT(A).

3. At the outset, in this case the learned counsel of the assessee submitted that this is an appeal relating to levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Rs.1,74,44,453 with reference to addition of Rs.5,68,14,843/- on account of the difference in price charged from sister concern. The learned counsel submitted that the quantum appeal with reference to which this penalty has been levied has already been decided in favour of the assessee by this tribunal in dated 01.09.2017.

4. Hence, the learned counsel pleaded that since the addition has already been deleted, the penalty levied does not survive.

5. Per Contra, the learned departmental representative accepted that the addition with reference to which this penalty has been levied has already been deleted by this tribunal, as above.

6. Accordingly, after careful consideration, we find that since the addition with reference to which this penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) has been levied and has already been deleted by the tribunal. The penalty levied with reference to the above addition also doesn't survive. Hence, the deletion of the penalty by the ld. CIT(A) is upheld.