V.S.MADASAMY,CHENNAI vs. ITO, VILLUPURAM

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Puducherry, dated 30.01.2015 for the assessment year 2009-10, confirming the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the excess expenditure incurred by the assessee in purchase of paddy. Ld.counsel submitted that when the issue of quantum addition made by the Assessing Officer came before this Tribunal in this Tribunal by an order dated 30.06.2015 remitted back the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration. Since the quantum addition made by the Assessing Officer was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer, according to the Ld. counsel, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer at this stage may not survive.

On the contrary, Shri G. Johnson, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that this Tribunal by an order dated 30.06.2015, remitted the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for reconsideration in respect of the excess expenditure incurred by the assessee to the extent of `12,41,714/- in purchase of paddy.

We have considered the submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. Admittedly, the Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of the so-called excess expenditure said to be incurred by the assessee in purchase of paddy to the extent of `12,41,714/-.

With the above observation, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.