M/S Mani Mandir Sewa Nyas Samiti, ... vs Department Of Income Tax
- CitationITA No.193/LKW/2014
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the assessee's claim for exemption under section 11 has been rejected on purely legal grounds, departing from the treatment accorded to the same assessee in earlier and subsequent years, such a departure does not by itself establish concealment of income, and a penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained on that basis; the Tribunal therefore declines to interfere with the deletion of the penalty.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
D.C.I.T., Vs. M/s Mani Mandir Seva Nyas Samiti, Circle - Faizabad Ram Ghat, Ayodyha, Faizabad - 224002 PAN:AAATM9513A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri P. K. Kapoor, C. A. Revenue by Shri Punit Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 25/03/2015 Date of pronouncement 30/04/2015
ORDER
PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.
This is revenue's appeal directed against the order of Learned CIT (A) - I Lucknow Dated 15.12.2013 for A.Y. 2006 - 2007.
2. The only grievance of the revenue is regarding deletion of penalty of Rs. 15,37,943/- imposed by the A.O. u/s 271 (1) (c).
3. Learned DR of the Revenue supported the penalty order. Learned A.R. of the assessee supported the order of CIT (A).
4. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the decision of learned CIT (A) is on this basis that in the present year, the claim of exemption has been rejected on legal grounds only which mark a departure from the earlier and subsequent years in which income was held to be exempt u/s 11 of the Act after 2
considering the capital expenditure as forming part of utilization. Learned DR of the revenue could not controvert this finding of CIT (A). In view of this, we are of the considered opinion that although exemption has been denied, it cannot be said that there is concealment justifying penalty u/s 271 (1) (c). We, therefore, decline to interfere in the order of CIT (A) on this issue.
5. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
(Order was pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page)
Sd/. Sd/.
(SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) Judicial Member Accountant Member
Dated:30/04/2015 *C.L.Singh
Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Asstt. Registrar
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free