SMT. TARA DEVI AGRAWAL,BHOPAL vs. THE NFAC CENTRE,DELHI, BHOPAL

PDF
ITA 115/IND/2023Status: HeardITAT Indore20 September 2023AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages

No AI summary yet for this case.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.09.2023Pronounced: 20.09.2023

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 02.02.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 15.03.2022 passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] concerning assessment year 2013-14, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Page 1 of 3

Tara Devi Agarwal, Bhopal v. NFAC, Delhi ITA No.115/Ind/2023 – AY 2013-14 2. Ld. AR for assessee carried us to Para No. 4 of the aforesaid penalty-

order dated 15.03.2022 and demonstrated that the AO has imposed penalty

of Rs. 1,60,143/- treating the income of Rs. 10,84,926/- as concealed

income. The components of the income of Rs. 10,84,926/- are (i) returned

income of Rs. 4,41,000/-, and (ii) addition of Rs. 6,43,926/- confirmed by

CIT(A) out of the addition made by AO.

3.

Then, Ld. AR submitted that, vide Para No. 2 / Page No. 3 of penalty-

order, Ld. AO has treated the returned-income of Rs. 4,41,000/- as

concealed income on the premise that the assessee failed to file return u/s

139(1) which is factually wrong. Ld. AR filed a copy of the return duly

acknowledged as No. 059150713018632 by ITO-3(1), Bhopal which shows

the returned-income of Rs. 4,41,000/- filed u/s 139(1) on 15.07.2013.

Regarding second basis of penalty i.e. the addition of Rs. 6,43,926/-

confirmed by CIT(A), Ld. AR submitted that the assessee went in next appeal

to ITAT, Indore Bench whereupon, through a consolidated order in IT(SS)A

No. 1 to 4/Ind/2020 for AY 2010-11 to 2014-15 dated 11.01.2023, the ITAT

has fully deleted the addition. Thus, Ld. AR submitted, entire penalty

imposed by AO has no legs to stand and hence un-sustainable. Therefore,

the impugned penalty deserves to be deleted fully. Ld. DR for revenue fairly

agreed to the submission of Ld. AR.

Page 2 of 3

Tara Devi Agarwal, Bhopal v. NFAC, Delhi ITA No.115/Ind/2023 – AY 2013-14

4.

In view of congruence by parties, we hereby delete the penalty. The assessee succeeds in this appeal.

5.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.09.2023.

Sd/- sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore �दनांक /Dated : 20.09.2023 CPU/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 3 of 3

SMT. TARA DEVI AGRAWAL,BHOPAL vs THE NFAC CENTRE,DELHI, BHOPAL | BharatTax