ACIT - 18 (1) Shri Manmohan Rathi 1st Floor, Piramal Chambers 8, Cama Indl. Estae Lalbaug, Mumbai 400012 Vs.
September, 13th 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
"B" Bench, Mumbai
Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President
and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member
ITA No. 6899/Mum/2011
(Assessment Year: 2006-07)
A C I T - 18 (1) Shri Manmohan Rathi
1st Floor, Piramal Chambers Vs. 8, Cama Indl. Estae
Lalbaug, Mumbai 400012 Sun Mill Compound
Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013
PAN - AABPR 0943 E
Appellant by: Shri Mohit Jain
Respondent by: Shri Sumeet Dalal
Date of Hearing: 11.09.2012
Date of Pronouncement: 11.09.2012
Per D. Manmohan, V.P.
This appeal filed at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the
order dated 02.08.2009 passed by the CIT(A) 29, Mumbai and it pertains to
2. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act levied by the AO but
cancelled by the CIT(A) is the subject matter of dispute before us.
3. At the time of hearing both the parties admitted that the addition
made in the assessment order, which was the basis for levy of penalty, no
longer subsists in the light of the decision of the ITAT "I" Bench Mumbai in
the quantum proceeding, i.e. ITA No. 3105/Mum/2009 dated 29th July,
2010. In the light of the decision of the ITAT in the quantum proceedings the
learned CIT(A) cancelled the penalty levied by the AO.
2 ITA No. 6899/Mum/2011
Shri Manmohan Rathi
4. Having regard to the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in
the order passed by the learned CIT(A). As pronounced in the open court the
appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th September 2012.
(Rajendra) (D. Manmohan)
Accountant Member Vice President
Mumbai, Dated: 11th September 2012
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT(A) 29, Mumbai
4. The CIT 18, Mumbai City
5. The DR, "B" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai
ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai