M/s Jai Shree Ram Stone Crushers (I) Pvt. Ltd. Rampur Road, Haldwani Distt. Nainital. Vs. ACIT, Haldwani,Distt. Nainital.
July, 17th 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH : `D' NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(Assessment Year : 2005-06)
M/s Jai Shree Ram Stone Crushers (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Haldwani,
Rampur Road, Haldwani Distt. Nainital.
Assessee by : Shri Tarun Kumar, Adv.
Revenue by : Ms. Srujani Mohanty, DR
PER U.B.S. BEDI JM
This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-II,
Dehradun dated 11.05.2011, whereby confirmation of penalty of Rs.7,25,000/- imposed
u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for assessment year 2005-06 has been challenged.
2. At the very outset, Ld.Counsel for the assessee while filing copy of the order in
quantum appeal in I.T.A. No.348/Del./2009 for assessment year 2005-06 dated
26.9.2011, submitted that matter in relation to addition made by the Assessing Officer
has been restored back on the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication and
since the very basis on which penalty has been imposed has vanished. Therefore, either
penalty should be quashed or matter should be restored back to the file of the Assessing
Officer for re-consideration of the penalty.
3. Ld.DR could not controvert this aspect and very fairly submitted that matter can
go back to the Assessing Officer for re-consideration of the penalty matter after quantum
2 I.T.A. No.3609/Del./2011)
(A.Y. : 2005-06)
4. We have heard both the sides, considered the material on record and find that the
addition on the basis on which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been imposed by the
Assessing Officer has since been set aside and matter has been restored back to the file of
the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication vide order dated 26.9.2011, therefore, it would
be just and appropriate to set aside the orders of authorities below in relation to penalty
and restore the matter back on the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to re-
decide the penalty after the issue of addition is re-decided by the Assessing Officer. We
hold and direct accordingly.
5. As a result, the appeal of the assessee gets accepted for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 16.07.2012.
(SHAMIM YAHYA) (U.B.S.BEDI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: July 16, 2012.
Copy forwarded to:-
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT
4. The CIT(A)II, Dehradun.
5. The DR, ITAT, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi.