Navinchandra V.Chokshi,Huf, Surat vs Department Of Income Tax

ी मक ु ु ल कुमार ावत, या यक सद य एवं ी एन.एस. सैनी, लेखा सद य के सम% BEFORE SHRI MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 784/Ahd/2011 [Asstt. Year: 1999-2000

ITO, Ward-9(3) Shri Navinchandra Vajulal Chokshi Surat. Vs 4-5, Vishvakaram Society New GIDC, Fulpada Road Katargam.

PAN : AABHC 5160 N

अपीलाथ'/ (Appellant) )*यथ'/ (Respondent)

Revenue by : Shri B.L. Yadav, Sr.DR Assessee(s) by : Written Submissions

सन ु वाई क तार ख/ Dateof Hearing : 24/02/2015 घोषणा क तार ख / Date of Pronouncement: 04/03/2015

आदे श/O R D E R

PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by

the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-V, Ahmedabad dated 19.11.2010.

2. The sole ground of the appeal taken by the Revenue is that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty of Rs.4,12,009/- under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the in assessment completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. section 148 of the Act dated 29.12.2006, the AO made addition of Rs.14,11,713/- on account of opening capital. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO.

ITA No.784/Ahd/2011 2 4. Thereafter, the AO levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income resulting into concealment of income of Rs.4,12,009/- being 100% of tax sought to be evaded.

5. On appeal filed by the assessee there against, the CIT(A) deleted the levy of penalty.

6. The assessee has filed before us along with written submission dated 23.2.2015 copy of the order of the Tribunal passed in the case of the assessee in ITA No.4418/Ahd/2007 order dated 8.8.2013 wherein the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication of the issue with similar direction given by the Tribunal in the case of Shri Alpeshkumar J. Mangukia & Ors., in ITA No.1419/Ahd/2009 and Ors. dated 17.2.2012. Thus, we find that as the quantum addition made, on which penalty has been levied, has been restored to the file of the AO by the Tribunal for fresh adjudication of the same, therefore, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the issue of levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act also back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, in the light of the decision taken in the set aside proceedings. Thus, this ground of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose.

7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Court on Wednesday the 4th March, 2015 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) ( N.S. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 04/03/2015 ITA No.784/Ahd/2011 3

आदे श क, ) त-ल.प अ/े.षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant

2. यथ / The Respondent.

3. संबं धत आयकर आयु!त / Concerned CIT

4. आयकर आय! ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A), Ahmedabad

5. $वभागीय 'त'न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6. गाड- फाईल / Guard file.

ु ार/ BY ORDER आदे शानस

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad