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

DCIT, Central Circle-25, Room No. 331, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., 440, New Delhi Vs. Prem Kumar Arora, Prop. Nanak Enterprises, Katra Ishwar Bhawan, Khari Baoli, Delhi
September, 10th 2015
            IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                  DELHI BENCH: `F ': NEW DELHI

           BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                              AND
         SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                      ITA Nos. 3433 & 3434/Del/2013
                    Assessment Years: 2001-02 & 2006-07

DCIT, Central Circle-25,              Vs.         Prem Kumar Arora,
Room No. 331, ARA Centre,                         Prop. Nanak Enterprises,
Jhandewalan Extn.,                                440, Katra Ishwar Bhawan,
New Delhi                                         Khari Baoli, Delhi
                                                   (PAN: AAHPK9790L)
    (Appellant)                                   (Respondent)

   Appellant by : Sh. Vivek Wadekar, CIT(DR)
   Respondent by : Sh. Sanjeev Bindal, CA

                                       Date of hearing: 27.08.2015
                                       Date of pronouncement: 09.09.2015

                                   ORDER

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M.:

      These two appeals by the Revenue are directed against different orders of

CIT(A), each dated 20.03.2013 passed for the assessment years 2001-02 and

2006-07 respectively. Since common grounds of appeal were raised in both the

appeals, we proceed to decide the appeals by a consolidated order. The Revenue

raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 3433/Del/2013:






"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in:
  1. The order of the CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts.
  2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law
      & fact in deleting the penalty imposed by the AO amounting to Rs.
      11,04,885/- for concealment of income u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.
  3. The appellant craves to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of
      appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal.
                                          2

2.      Brief facts of the case are that a search & seizure operations under Section

132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") were conducted in the

premises of the appellant on 22.11.2006. As a result of which certain documents

were found and based on this incriminating material, the Assessing Officer

issued notice under Section 153A of the Act. In response to which, the

respondent assessee filed return of income disclosing undisclosed income for

various assessment years i.e. 2001-02 and 2007-08 and the assessment order

was passed under Section 153A. For the assessment year 2001-02, an addition of

Rs. 35,03,118/- and for the assessment year 2006-07 Rs. 57,50,853/- was made.

This addition was confirmed by the CIT(A) and, however, on further appeal

before the ITAT, the additions were deleted. While the matter stood thus, the

Assessing Officer proceeded with the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of

the Act and levied the penalty of Rs. 11,04,885/- for the assessment year 2001-

02 and Rs. 16,25,609/- for the assessment year 2006-07. On appeal before the

CIT(A), the CIT(A) following the order of the Tribunal deleting the penalty for

the assessment year 2004-05,        allowed the appeal filed by the respondent

assessee vide para 4.2 of his order, which reads as under:

     "4.2        I have considered the assessment and penalty orders, order of
     the Hon'ble ITAT and the submissions filed. The facts of the case are the
     same as for AY 2004-05 wherein the penalty imposed u/s 241(1)(c) was
     deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT vide its order dated 09.03.2012 cancelled the
     order of CIT(A) confirming the penalty and deleted the said penalty. It has
     been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Kamlakshi
     Finance Corp. Ltd. [AIR 1992 SC 711] and Khalid Automobiles Vs.
     Union of India [4 SCC (Suppl.) 653] that the decisions of the
     jurisdictional High Court and the Tribunal are binding on the income-tax
                                          3

     authorities without any reservation. Following the decision of the Hon'ble
     ITAT in the appellant's own case, the ground of appeal is to be allowed."

3.      Since the CIT(A) followed the decision of the Tribunal in its own case

for the assessment year 2004-05 where similar additions were made, we do

not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). Hence, the

grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

4.      In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.

        The decision is pronounced in the open court on 9 th September, 2015.



            Sd/-                                         Sd/-
     (H.S. SIDHU)                                 (INTURI RAMA RAO)
  JUDICIAL MEMBER                                ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 9th September, 2015.
RK/-
Copy forwarded to:
1.    Appellant
2.    Respondent
3.    CIT
4.    CIT(A)
5.    DR
                                                  Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting