M/s. Aarkee Engineers v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Baroda - 2016-LL-0920-53

Citation	2016-LL-0920-53
Appellant Name	M/s. Aarkee Engineers
Respondent Name	Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Baroda
Court	ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	20/09/2016
Assessment Year	2001-02
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	returned income • estimate basis
Bot Summary:	The only grievance of the assessee relates to the levy of penalty u/s. The roots for the levy of penalty lie in the assessment order made u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 18.03.2004 where to the returned income following additions were made. The A.O. has levied the penalty in respect of the additions made in the quantum assessment proceedings which was confirmed by the ld. The G.P. addition was substantially reduced additions on account of vehicle expenses were confirmed. Considering the aforementioned factual matrix that the additions have been made either on estimated basis or 3 ITA No. 2523/Ahd/2013. In our considered opinion and the understanding of the law, levy of penalty u/s.

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH (BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA. No: 2523/AHD/2013 (Assessment Year: 2001-02) M/s. Aarkee Engineers, 5/B V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chetana Society, Hariom 2 (5), Baroda Nagar Road, Race Course, Baroda (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AACFA0034C Appellant by : Shri Anil R. Shah, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Raj Deep Singh, Sr. D.R. ORDER Date of hearing : 19 -09-2016 Date of Pronouncement : 20 -09-2016 PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal by Assessee is preferred against order of Ld. CIT(A)-II, Baroda dated 12.10.2006 pertaining to A.Y. 2001-02. 2 ITA No. 2523/Ahd/2013 . A.Y. 2001-02 2. only grievance of assessee relates to levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Act which was confirmed by ld. CIT(A). 3. roots for levy of penalty lie in assessment order made u/s. 143(3) of Act dated 18.03.2004 where to returned income following additions were made. 1. On account of G.P. Rs. 6,21,059/- 2. On account of Vehicle Expenses Rs. 10,122/- 3. On account of Office Expenses Rs. 8,631/- 4. matter travelled up to Tribunal and Tribunal vide order dated 22/01/2010 in ITA No. 1005/Ahd/2006 gave relief to assessee which can be understood by following chart:- Sr. As per ROI Additions as CIT(A) ITAT Para No. per A.O. on Estimate Basis 1 Total Income Declare 2,12,670 - - - 2 G.P. Addition - 6,21,059 6,21,059 2,50,000 3 Vehicle Expenses - 10,122 10,122 10,122 4 Office Expenses - 8,631 - - Total 6,39,812 6,31,181 2,60,122 5. A.O. has levied penalty in respect of additions made in quantum assessment proceedings which was confirmed by ld. CIT(A). 6. aforementioned chart speaks for itself. G.P. addition was substantially reduced, though, additions on account of vehicle expenses were confirmed. Considering aforementioned factual matrix that additions have been made either on estimated basis or 3 ITA No. 2523/Ahd/2013 . A.Y. 2001-02 on ad-hoc basis, would not justify invocation of provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of Act. In our considered opinion and understanding of law, levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Act is totally unjustified on facts of case in hand. We, accordingly, set aside findings of ld. CIT(A) and direct A.O. to delete penalty so levied. 7. In result, appeal filed by Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 20 - 09- 2016. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. GODARA) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: True Copy Rajesh Copy of Order forwarded to:- 1. Appellant. 2. Respondent. 3. CIT (Appeals) 4. CIT concerned. 5. DR., ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. Guard File. By ORDER Deputy/Asstt.Registrar ITAT,Ahmedabad M/s. Aarkee Engineers v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Baroda

Metadata

Judgment