Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: empanelment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: form 3cd :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: VAT RATES :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: due date for vat payment :: TDS :: VAT Audit :: articles on VAT and GST in India
 
 
From the Courts »
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21
 CHAUDHARY SKIN TRADING COMPANY Vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-21
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 Deputy Director Of Income Tax Vs. Virage Logic International
 Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 International Taxation Vs. Virage Logic International India
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-06 Vs. Moderate Leasing And Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.
 ITO vs. Vikram A. Pradhan (ITAT Mumbai)

Koyna Glass Works P Ltd., 2/C Lawerence & Mayo House, 276 Dr. D N Road Road, Mumbai 400 001 Vs. ITO Ward 1 (2)(2), Mumbai
October, 23rd 2015
               ,   Û `',  
               IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                    MUMBAI BENCHES "A", MUMBAI

             Before Shri G S Pannu, AM & Shri Sanjay Garg, JM

                   ITA No.4827/Mum/2011
                 [ [ / Assessment Year : 2000 - 01

Koyna Glass Works P Ltd.,                 ITO Ward 1 (2)(2),
2/C Lawerence & Mayo House,               Mumbai
276 Dr. D N Road Road,              Vs
Mumbai 400 001
PAN AACCK7983K
     ( /Appellant)                               (×/Respondent)


           Appellant By      : Shri Vimal Punmiya
           Respondent By     : Shri E Shridhar

     /                                      /
Date of Hearing :28.07.2015.             Date of Pronouncement :21.10.2015


                                    ORDER


Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

     The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order

of the CIT(A) -2, Mumbai, dated 03.03.2011 pertaining to A.Y. 2000-01.


2.   The    assessee    in   this    appeal     has   agitated   the   levy   of

penalty under section 271B of the Income tax Act for non compliance of the

provisions of section 44 of I.T.Act by the Assessing Officer holding that the

assessee had failed to get his accounts audited in respects of previous year

despite its turnover of more than Rs.6 Cores.
                                      2




                                                               ITA 4827/Mum/11
                                                             Koyna Glass Pvt. Ltd.

3.   The learned AR of the assessee, at the outset, has stated that in this

case, the Assessing Officer has failed to take necessary prior approval from

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax as per the provisions of section 274 of

the I.T.Act. The learned DR could not disprove or deny this fact on the file.

The penalty levied by the lower authorities is thus bad in law as the same

being hit by the provisions of section 274 of the Act as the amount of

penalty exceeds twenty thousand rupees and the Assessing Officer was

required to get the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner before

proceeding to levy the penalty under section 271B of the Act. The case is

squarely could by the order of the co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal

dated 20.05.2015 in the case of M/s. Precision Shears & Knives Pvt. Ltd. for

A.Y. 2000-01, wherein it has been held as under:


     "8.1 A perusal of the above section clearly shows that the AO
     had to take permission from the Joint Commissioner before
     levying the penalty as the amount exceeded Rs.10,000/-. There
     is nothing in the order of the penalty which could show that the
     ITO has taken prior permission from the Joint Commissioner.
     When a statute required a thing to be done in a certain manner,
     it shall be done in that manner alone. When a particular
     authority has been designated to record his satisfaction on any
     particular issue, then it is that authority along who should apply
     his independent mind to record his satisfaction and satisfaction
     so recorded should be independent and not borrowed or dictated
     satisfaction. Considering the facts of the case, in the light of the
     provisions of Sec. 274 of the Act, we have no hesitation to hold
     that the AO has levied penalty in contravention to the provisions
     of Sec. 274 of the Act and, therefore, the order of the First
                                        3

                                                                   ITA 4827/Mum/11
                                                                 Koyna Glass Pvt. Ltd.

        Appellate authority is liable to be set aside. We direct the AO to
        delete the penalty so levied."


        In view of the above decision of the Tribunal, the penalty levied by

 the lower authorities is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is

 accordingly ordered to be deleted.





 4.     In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed.


        Order pronounced in the open court on 21st October, 2015.

                       Sd/-                               Sd/-
                (G S PANNU)                        (SANJAY GARG)
             ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                   JUDICIAL MEMBER
                      st
   Mumbai;  Dated : 21 October, 2015.
 

 SA

         /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.     /The Appellant.
2.    × / The Respondent.
3.      () / The CIT(A), Mumbai.
       È
4.       / CIT
       È
5.     ,   ,   / DR, `A' Bench, ITAT,
      Mumbai


                                                   / BY ORDER,
 ×  //True Copy//

                                      /  (Dy./Asstt. Registrar)
                                  ,  / ITAT, Mumbai

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
System Testing Solution Manual Software Testing Solutions Automation Software Testing Solutions System Workflow Testing System Manual Testing

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions