BAJAJ INTERNATIONAL P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(1), MUMBAI

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद�य लेखा सद�य, राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ PER Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार Challenging the orders dated 01/07/2011 of the CIT (A)-7, Mumbai the assessee has filed the appeals for the above-mentioned two Assessment Years(AY.s).Since,common issue i.e.levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act,is involved,the appeals were heard together and being disposed of by way of this common order.Assessee-company is engaged in the business of trading in export of electric goods and appliances. ITA/7897/Mum/2011: 2.For the AY.2003-04,the assesee filed its return of income on 27/01/2003,declaring total income of Rs. 90.14 lakhs. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act,on 28/02/2006,determining the income of the assessee at Rs. 97.42 lakhs.The matter was reopened after issuing a notice u/s. 148 on the ground that taxable income had escaped assessment on account of illegal payment of commission to Iraqi Government under the Oil for Food Programme.The re-assessment was completed on 31/10/2007,wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.99.76 lakhs in view of the disallowance of Rs. 2.18 lakhs. 3.During the appellate proceedings,the First Appellate Authority (FAA) allowed partial relief to the assessee.It filed appeal before the Tribunal.Vide its order dated 30/11/2016 (ITA 6837/ Mum/2008,AY.2005-06 and ITA/1753/Mum/2009-AY.2003-04),the Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal for both the years.In the meanwhile the AO had initiated penalty

7897/11 &7898/11-Bajaj Intl. proceedings and had levied a penalty of Rs.85,770/-,vide his order dated 23/03/2010. In the appellate proceedings, the FAA confirmed the penalty order of the AO.

4.Before us,the Authorised Representative(AR) and the Departmental Representative (DR) agreed that quantum appeal has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal. Considering the fact that addition made by the AO and confirmed by the FAA have been deleted by the Tribunal,while deciding the quantum appeal,we reverse the order of the FAA. Effective ground of appeal,raised by the assessee stands allowed.

ITA/7898/MUM/2011-AY.2005-06: Facts of the case for the year under consideration are identical to the facts of the AY.2003- 04.As the quantum appeal has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal,so,we delete the penalty levied by the AO.