DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S. RIDGE HOUSING INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1950/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 October 2015AY 2008-095 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, relying on a previous decision in a related case (Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT). The Tribunal found that the grounds contested by the Revenue in the present appeal were similar to those in the earlier case.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer. The penalty was related to an addition on account of low Gross Profit, which the assessee failed to conclusively establish the genuineness of purchases and produce parties concerned.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was rightly deleted by the CIT(A) when the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of purchases and produce concerned parties.

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, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R. S. SYAL & SMT SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Smt. Nandita Kanchan CIT
Hearing: 01.10.2015

ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

This appeal is filed by the revenue and CO is filed by the assessee against order dated 17/01/2013 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-I, Gurgaon. The grounds of appeal in are as follows:- “1. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(A) CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty of Rs.5,03,610/- imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 especially when the books of account of the assessee were an reliable and an addition on account of low G.P was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A)?.

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty of Rs.5,03,610/- imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 especially when:- a) The assessee failed to conclusively establish the genuineness of the parties from whom purchases were made. b) Failed to produce the parties concerned. c) Failed authenticate what was shown in the books of account. d) Failed to justify the trading results and books of accounts were not showing the results as frees from blemishes and in such a situation it was difficult to agree with the contention of the assessee that since the payments were made through account payee cheque, it would be genuine’

2. This appeal pertains to the issue of penalty under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The quantum appeal of the same (ITA No. 169/Del/2011) is dismissed in light of the order of Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5599/Del/2010) and ACIT Vs. Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 5706/Del/2010) dated 08.07.2015.

3. The AR submitted an order dated 8th July 2015 passed by the ITAT Delhi Bench in in case of searched party i.e. Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd., wherein the appeal of Piyush Developers has been allowed and pointed out that in fact the grounds contested by the Revenue in the present case are similar.

4. The DR totally relied on Penalty order but could not differentiate the order passed by this Tribunal in Piyush Developers case.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the records and found that the issue contested before the ITAT in the present case are covered by Piyush Developers Pvt. Ltd.

6.

In result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 7th of October, 2015.

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 →