Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

ACIT, Cent. Cir.25, Room No.404, 4th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan,Mumbai 400 020 Vs. Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar, 41, Jeswani House, M.G. Road,Panvel, Navi Mumbai 410 206
December, 18th 2014
               IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
                      MUMBAI BENCH "G", MUMBAI

       BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
               SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                                ITA No.2599/M/2012
                              Assessment Year: 2007-08

        ACIT, Cent. Cir.25,                  Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar,
        Room No.404, 4th Floor,              41, Jeswani House,
        Aayakar Bhavan,                  Vs. M.G. Road,
        Mumbai ­ 400 020                     Panvel,
                                             Navi Mumbai ­ 410 206
                                             PAN: AAPPT 1825P
             (Appellant)                        (Respondent)


      Assessee by                 : Shri Manish Sanghavi, A.R.
      Revenue by                  : Shri R.N. D'Souza, D.R.

      Date of Hearing             : 22.10.2014
      Date of Pronouncement       : 17.12.2014

                                    ORDER


Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

      The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order
dated 30.01.2012 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [(hereinafter
referred to as CIT(A)]. The Revenue has agitated the action of the Ld. CIT(A)
in reducing/directing the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO)
to levy penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.






2.    At the outset, the Ld. AR for the assessee has brought our attention to
the order of the Tribunal in the own case of the assessee passed in ITA
Nos.3372 & Ors./M/2010 decided on 09.04.2013 and submitted that the issues
in relation to which the additions/disallowances were made and consequent
penalty was levied by the AO have been set aside by the Tribunal to the file of
                                          2                                ITA No.2599/M/2012
                                                                    Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar


the AO vide the said order dated 09.04.2013 for decision afresh. He has
therefore submitted that since the order of the AO relating to issues upon
which the additions/disallowances were made has been set aside by the
Tribunal, hence the consequential penalty cannot be sustained.
The Ld. D.R., after going through the order of the Tribunal dated 09.04.2013,
has also agreed that the matter relating to quantum additions has been set aside
by the Tribunal to the file of the AO for decision afresh.

3.       Since the order of the AO on the issues in relation to which the quantum
additions were made has already been set aside by the Tribunal for decision
afresh, hence the very basis upon which the consequential penalty was levied
has ceased to exist. Therefore, the consequential penalty is not sustainable in
the eyes of law and the same is accordingly ordered to be deleted.






3.1      However, before parting with the order it is clarified that if the AO will
find during the fresh assessment proceedings that the case of the assessee is
also fit for levy of penalty in terms of the fresh assessment order, he will be at
liberty to initiate fresh penalty proceedings accordingly.

4.       In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.




                  Order pronounced in the open court on 17.12.2014.



         Sd/-                                                Sd/-
   (B.R. Baskaran)                                      (Sanjay Garg)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                   JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 17.12.2014.
* Kishore, Sr. P.S.
                                            3                             ITA No.2599/M/2012
                                                                   Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar


Copy to: The Appellant
        The Respondent
        The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
        The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai
        The DR Concerned Bench
//True Copy//                           [




                                                By Order



                              Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting