Praja Exports, Mumbai vs Assessee

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH "C", MUMBAI ᮰ी आर. आर. सी. सी. शमाᭅ, लेखा सद᭭य एवं ᮰ी िववेक वमाᭅ, ᭠याियक सद᭭य के समᭃ । BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. : 1844/Mum/2013 (Assessment year : 2001-02) M/s Praja Exports, Vs ITO- 19(1)(1), 7/153, Nityanand Nagar 4, Piramal Chambers, S N Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai -400 012 Mumbai - 400 069 ःथयी लेखा सं.:PAN: AADFP 5244 Q अपीलाथȸ (Appellant) ू×यथȸ (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Bhupendra Shah Respondent by : Shri Premanand J

सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 08-12-2014 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 23-01-2015

आ दे श ORDER ि᮰ िववेक वमाᭅ, ᭠या स:

PER VIVEK VARMA, JM:

Instant appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) 22, Mumbai, dated 22.01.2013, wherein the assessee has challenged the levy of penalty of Rs. 1,94,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, sustained by the CIT(A).

2. The facts are that the assessee is a manufacturer and exporter of readymade garments. The regular assessment u/s 143(3) was framed at Rs. 18,33,317/-, wherein the AO had framed the assessment without considering the premium on quota, for the purposes of computation of deduction u/s 80HHC.

3. The issue was sustained by the CIT(A) and the matter reached the ITAT. The ITAT, after hearing the appeal, set aside the issue to the file of the AO with a direction to decide the issue as per law on the issue of deduction u/s 80HHC in respect of export quota after referring to the facts.

2 M/s Praja Exports, ITA 1844/M/2013

4. In this reassessment stage, wherein the issue has been impugned, the penalty has been levied and sustained.

5. On going through the order of penalty u/s 271(1)(c), and the order of the ITAT in the quantum, we do not find anything to suggest that the claim made by the assessee was mala fide. Had it been so, the ITAT in ITA No. 41/Mum/2009 would have confirmed the disallowance/addition & they would not have set aside the issue for a fresh adjudication.

6. This itself is a good ground for us to delete the penalty, because the facts, details and claim which have been made, are emerging from the details as filed.

7. It is not the case of the department that the assessee had claimed any deduction with a mala fide intention, and which is otherwise not permissible. Since the ITAT itself, on facts felt that the claim could be allowed, they set aside the issue.

8. In such a circumstance, in our opinion, the case of CIT vs Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd., reported in 322 ITR 158 (SC) is squarely applicable.

9. We, therefore, set aside the order of the revenue authorities and delete the penalty.

10. In the result, the appeal as filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 23rd January, 2015.

(आर.

आर. सी.

सी. शमाᭅ) (िववेक वमाᭅ) Sd/- Sd/-

लेखा सदःय Ûयाईक सदःय (R C SHARMA) (VIVEK VARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Date: 23rd January, 2015 3 M/s Praja Exports, ITA 1844/M/2013

ूित/Copy to:-

1) अपीलाथȸ /The Appellant.

2) ू×यथȸ /The Respondent.

3) The CIT(A) -22, Mumbai.

4) The CIT-19, Mumbai/CIT -19, Mumbai.

5) ǒवभागीय ूितिनिध "C", आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुब ं ई/ The D.R. "C" Bench, Mumbai.

6) गाड[ फाईल Copy to Guard File.

आदे शानुसार/By Order / / True Copy / /

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुबं ई Dy./Asstt. Registrar I.T.A.T., Mumbai

*चåहान व.िन.स *Chavan, Sr.PS