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
 Karnataka High Court restrains Bengaluru-based Institute of Chartered Tax Practitioners India from enrolling candidates for its courses
 Attachment on Cash Credit of Assessee under GST Act: Delhi HC directs Bank to Comply Instructions to Vacate
 Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court
 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

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

                                ITA No.3609/Del./2011
                               (Assessment Year : 2005-06)

M/s Jai Shree Ram Stone Crushers (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs.         ACIT, Haldwani,
Rampur Road, Haldwani                                      Distt. Nainital.
Distt. Nainital.
(PAN/GIR No.AABCJ2477L)

(Appellant)                                                (Respondent)

                       Assessee by : Shri Tarun Kumar, Adv.
                       Revenue by : Ms. Srujani Mohanty, DR

                                      ORDER

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
is decided.
                                             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.

            Sd/-                                          Sd/-
      (SHAMIM YAHYA)                                 (U.B.S.BEDI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                              JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: July         16, 2012.
*SKB*
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.


                                                                        AR/ITAT





Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2025 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting