M/s Manglam Repository(P)Ltd.,, Varanasi v. ACIT,, Varanasi

ITA 195/ALLD/2014 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2015 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 19520714 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN AAECM8535H
Bench Allahabad
Appeal Number ITA 195/ALLD/2014
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant M/s Manglam Repository(P)Ltd.,, Varanasi
Respondent ACIT,, Varanasi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-04-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 30-04-2015
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 24-04-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AN D SHRI C. N. PRASAD JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 195/A/2014 A.Y. 2010-11 M/S. MANGLAM REPOSITORY PVT. LTD VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 36-A RAVINDRAPURI CENTRAL CIRCLE VARANASI VARANASI ( PAN: AAECM8535H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 211/A/2014 A.Y. 2010-11 MANISH KUMAR DIDWANIA VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX NO.36A RAVINDRAPURI CENTRAL CIRCLE BHELUPURI VARANASI VARANASI (PAN: AABSPD5677M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHISH BANSAL & SHRI SAURABH AGARWAL REVENUE BY : SHRI UMESH PATHAK DATE OF HEARING : 29.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.04.2015 O R D E R PER BENCH: THERE ARE TWO APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) VARANASI. 2. AT THE OUTSET LEARNED COUNSEL BROUGHT TO OUR NO TICE THAT IN THESE TWO CASES THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 142(1) CALLING FOR RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2010-11 AND ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURNS TOO. DETAILING THE RELEV ANT FACT LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID NOTICES DATED 01.03.2011 WERE ISSUED AND THE DUE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE IS ITA NO. 195/A/2014 A.Y. 2010-11 2 15.03.2011. IT IS ALSO BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICES THAT THE ASSESSEE DULY FURNISHED BY FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 7 TH AND 8 TH MARCH 2011 I.E. PRIOR TO THE DUE DATE ON 15.03.2011. IGNORING THE SAID COMPLIANCE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 30.03.2012. 3. BEFORE US LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE PENALTY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LEVIED WHEN THERE IS A COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSES. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR WE PERUSE THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AND THE RELEVANT FACTS AND DATES WE FIND THAT IN THESE TWO CASES THE RETURNS WERE FILED DULY BEFORE THE DUE DATE SET BY THE AO. THEREFORE IN OUR OPINION IT SHOULD CONSTI TUTE COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT. CONSIDERING THE SAME WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASES FOR LEVY OF PENALTIES U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE AC T. ACCORDINGLY GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSES ARE ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSES ARE ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF APRIL 2015. SD/- SD/- (C. N. PRASAD) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ALLAHABAD DATED: 30.04.2015 *SRIVASTAVA COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT CONCERNED ALLAHABAD THE CIT(A) CONCERNED ALLAHABAD THE DR BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT ALLAHABAD.