Rajni Bisht, Rishikesh vs Department Of Income Tax

Appellant by : Shri Vikram Sahay, Sr.DR. Respondent by : Shri Tarun Kumar, Advocate and Shri A.K. Agarwal, CA.

Date of hearing : 10.04.2015 Date of pronouncement : 06.05.2015

ORDER

PER G.C. GUPTA, GUPTA, VP :

This appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2005-06 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-II, Dehradun dated 16th September, 2013.

2. The only ground of appeal raised by the Revenue is as under:-

"Whether the ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the A.O. did not travel beyond the finding in quantum to justify levy of penalty and completely ignored the facts as mentioned in Para I to VI in the penalty order dated 20.11.2012 which justify the levy of concealment and mens-rea of escapement of true particulars in the case of the assessee."

2 ITA-6195/Del/2013

3. The learned counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the Revenue's appeal is not maintainable since the disputed amount of penalty was `3,76,000/-, which is apparently less than the mandatory limit of `4,00,000/- prescribed by the CBDT for filing an appeal before the Tribunal. He submitted that the word "tax" in the Circular of the CBDT includes penalty and this issue is covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the Delhi Tribunal dated 28th July, 2011 in ACIT Vs. Ashok Bhasin vide ITA No.4623/Del/2009.

4. The learned DR submitted that the word "tax" does not include penalty imposed on the assessee and, therefore, the present appeal should be held as maintainable.

5. We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the order of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). We find that the issue whether tax includes penalty is covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the Delhi Tribunal in Ashok Bhasin (supra). The disputed amount of penalty in this case is admittedly less than `4,00,000/-, the mandatory limit laid down by the CBDT for filing appeals before the Tribunal. In these facts, we hold that the present appeal filed by the Revenue is not maintainable and is dismissed in limine.

6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Decision pronounced in the open Court on 6th May, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) RAO) (G.C. (G.C. GUPTA) GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

VK. 3 ITA-6195/Del/2013

Copy forwarded to: -

1. Appellant : Income Tax Officer, Ward- Ward-1, Rishikesh.

2. Respondent : Ms. Rajni Bisht, D/o Shri Prem Singh Bisht, 177/180, Ashutosh Nagar, Nehru Marg, Rishikesh.

3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT

Assistant Registrar