SANGHAVI JEWELLERY MFG.CO. PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O.-8(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2528/MUM/2012Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 April 2017AY 2004-052 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the AO to give effect to its previous order and decide the penalty levy denovo after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's penalty order under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee requested the matter be set aside to the AO for fresh adjudication after giving effect to a previous Tribunal order.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) should be adjudicated denovo after giving effect to a previous Tribunal order, and if the assessee concealed income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri
Hearing: 17.04.2017Pronounced: 19.04.2017

अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri B.V. Jhaveri प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Dr. A.K. Nayak, DR सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 17.04.2017 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.04.2017 आदेश / O R D E R

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee on 16.4.2012 is against the order of the CIT (A)-18, Mumbai dated 29.2.2012 for the assessment year 2004-05. In this appeal, assessee raised four grounds in toto and they revolve around the CIT (A)’s decision in confirming the order of the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

2.

At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the grounds raised

in this appeal need to be set aside to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after giving effect to the order of the Tribunal in dated 22.12.2016 on merits of the addition.

3. After hearing the Ld Representatives of both the parties and on perusal of the above cited order of the Tribunal dated 22.12.2016 (supra), we find, the Tribunal deleted few additions (vide para 8) or remanded certain issues (para 12 of the said Tribunal’s order is relevant). Without going into the details of the same, we are of the opinion, the prayer of the assessee given in para 10 of his written submissions should be allowed. The said para reads as under:-

10. The assessee company, therefore, respectfully, submits that the order levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act may be set aside and the penalty proceedings may be restored to the file of the Income Tax Officer with a direction to pass the order giving effect to the order of the Appellate Tribunal and thereafter to decide denovo whether it can be held that the assessee company has concealed its income in the year under consideration.

3.

Considering the above and after hearing both the parties, we direct the AO to give effect to the order of the Tribunal and decide the levy of penalty denovo after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the set principles of natural justice. Accordingly, grounds raised

by the assessee in the apeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th April, 2017.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →