Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI : JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Yr: 2008-09 DCIT, Central Circle-1, Vs. Tej Pal Singh Chadha, Faridabad. 10, Mathura Road, Jangpura, New Delhi. PAN: ALJPS 2151 E ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. M.K. Jain Sr. DR Assessee by : Sh. Sanjeev Puri CA Date of hearing : 19/04/2016. Date of order : 25/04/2016. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:
This is revenue’s appeal against the order dated 13.12.2013, passed by the ld. CIT(A) (Central), Gurgaon in appeal no. 28F/CIT(A)(C)/GGN/2012-13, relating to A.Y. 2008-09, deleting the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Brief facts of the case are that search and seizure operation u/s 132 was carried out at the residential premises of Shri Tej Pal Singh on 16.1.2008. AO had made addition of Rs. 4,16,66,666/- in respect of sale of property at village Mewla Maharajpur, Faridabad. Ld. CIT(A) had confirmed the additions against which appeal was preferred by assessee.
The AO had initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and vide order dated 30.3.2012 levied a penalty of Rs. 2,83,24,500/- being 300% of the tax sought to be evaded. Ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty following the order of the Tribunal in quantum appeals. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that in quantum appeal, the ITAT Delhi Bench ‘H’ vide its order dated 22.11.2013 rendered in has deleted the addition which was the subject matter of imposition of impugned penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The ld. CIT(A) in deleting the penalty in question has relied on the Tribunal’s order in quantum appeal. Since, in quantum, the very basis for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) has gone, we see no reason to interfere in the order of ld. CIT(A) deleting the penalty in question. The order of ld. CIT(A) is upheld. 5. In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronouncement in open court on 25/04/2016.