A.C. CHENNA REDDY, MUMBAI v. ACIT CEN CIR 2, THANE

ITSSA 40/MUM/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 4019916 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN ACDPA3902G
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITSSA 40/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant A.C. CHENNA REDDY, MUMBAI
Respondent ACIT CEN CIR 2, THANE
Appeal Type Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
Pronouncement Date 23-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 23-11-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 03-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERBHADRAPPA PRESIDENT AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(SS) A.NO.40/MUM/2010 BLOCK PERIOD 01/04/1996 TO 26/03/2003 SHRI A.C. CHENNA REDDY FLAT NO.103 MANISHA TOWER TATA COLONY MULUND (WEST) MUMBAI -400 081 ....... APPELLANT VS ASSTT. COMM. OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 THANE ..... RESPONDENT PAN: ACDPA 3902 G APPELLANT BY: SHRI PRAKASH JHUNJHUNWALA RESPONDENT BY: MRS. USHA NAIR DATE OF HEARING: 23.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23.11.2011 O R D E R PER R.S. PADVEKAR JM IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPU GNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) -I THANE DATED 31.03.2010 CONFI RMING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE A.O. U/S.158BFA(2) OF THE ACT. THE A SSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN THE APPEAL:- THE APPELLANT PREFERS AN APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER PA SSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I THANE ON FO LLOWING AMONGST OTHER GROUNDS EACH OF WHICH ARE WITHOUT PRE JUDICE TO ANY OTHER:- 1.0 ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN L AW LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY U/S.158BFA(2) O F ` 20 47 12 232/-; 2.0 THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY IN HASTILY MANNER ON IGNORING GROSSLY THE WRITTEN SUBM ISSION IT(SS)A.NO.40/MUM/2010 SHRI A.C. CHENNA REDDY 2 SEVERAL JUDICIAL DECISIONS RELIED BY THE APPELLANT THEREBY VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE; 3.0 THE LD. CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE RE ASONABLE CAUSE UNDER WHICH CIRCUMSTANCES THE LEVY OF HARSH PENALTY BEING QUASI-CRIMINAL IN NATURE IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 4.0 A HUMBLE PRAYER IS MADE TO DELETE THE PENALTY U /S.158BFA OF ` 20 47 12 232/- AS THE QUANTUM ADDITIONS MADE IN BL OCK ASSESSMENT U/S.158BC HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY HONBLE ITAT A BENCH MUMBAI. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE AS UNDER. THE ASSE SSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND HE IS ENGAGING THE BUSINESS AS A CIV IL CONTRACTOR MOSTLY UNDERTAKING GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS FOR THE CON STRUCTION OF THE CANALS AND DAMS. THERE WAS SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPER ATION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE U/S.132 OF THE ACT ON 26.3.2003. FINALLY THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S.158BC(C) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 1.6.2007 DETERMINING THE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT ` 32 49 40 050/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE RETURNS FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD FROM 1.4.1996 TO 26.3.2003 DECLARING NIL UNDISCLOSED INCOME BUT S AID DECLARATION WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. THE A.O. ALSO INITIATED P ENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.158BFA(2) OF THE ACT AND LEVIED THE PENALTY OF ` 20 47 12 232/- VIDE ORDER DATED 21.05.2009. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENG ED THE PENALTY ORDER BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) BUT WITHOUT SUCCESS AN D NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT (A). 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBM ITS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED BY THE A.O. FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD FROM 1.4.1996 TO 26.3.2003 BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY FILING THE APPEAL BEING IT(SS) 2/M/2009 AND TRIBUNA L WAS PLEASED TO RESTORE THE ENTIRE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. T O DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AND ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. HE PLEADS THAT AS THE QUANTUM ITSELF DOES NOT SURVIVE AS THE MATTER IS RESTORED T O THE FILE OF THE A.O. IT(SS)A.NO.40/MUM/2010 SHRI A.C. CHENNA REDDY 3 PENALTY ALSO DOES NOT SURVIVE AND SAME MAY BE DELET ED. WE HAVE ALSO HEARD THE LD. D.R. 4. WE FIND THAT AS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL T HE TRIBUNAL RESTORED THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT MATTER TO THE FILE O F THE A.O. BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES FOR FRESH DETERMINATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. AS THE QU ANTUM WHICH IS BASIS FOR LEVY OF THE PENALTY HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL THE PENALTY ORDER ALSO DOES NOT SURVIVE. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND CANCEL THE PENALTY ORDER PAS SED BY THE A.O. U/S.158BFA(2) DATED 21.05.2004 WITH THE LIBERTY TO THE A.O. TO CONSIDER IT AFRESH WHETHER SAME IS REQUIRED TO BE LEVIED U/S.158BFA(2) IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PASSING FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBU NALS ORDER DATED 9.7.2010 PASSED IN IT(SS) NO.2/M/2009. WE ACCORD INGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND DELETE PENALTY. 5. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED AS P ER TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 2 3RD OF NOVEMBER 2011. SD/- SD/- ( G.E. VEERBHADRAPPA ) PRESIDENT ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATE : 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) -I THANE. 4) THE CIT (CENTRAL) PUNE. 5) THE D.R. A BENCH MUMBAI. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T. MUMBAI *CHAVAN IT(SS)A.NO.40/MUM/2010 SHRI A.C. CHENNA REDDY 4 SR.N. EPISODE OF AN ORDER DATE INITIALS CONCERNED 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 23.11.2011 SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 23.11.2011 SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER