Thukral Regal Shoes, Chandigarh vs Department Of Income Tax
- CitationITA No. 773/CHD/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The levy of penalty for concealment or inaccurate particulars is dependent on the existence of a surviving quantum addition; where the addition on which the penalty rests has been deleted in the quantum proceedings, no penalty can be sustained on that basis, and the penalty must fall with it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
The ACI T, Vs M/s Thukral Regal Shoes, Circle 2 (1), SCO 88, Sector 17D, Chandigarh. Chandigarh.
PAN: AAAFT5204F &
CO 27/CHD/2013 In ITA No. 773/CHD/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08
M/s Thukral Regal Shoes, Vs The ACI T, SCO 88, Sector 17D, Circle 2(1), Chandigarh. Chandigarh.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri Gurjit Singh Respondent by : Shri S.K.Mittal
Date of Hearing : 29.04.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2015
O R D E R
PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM
The departmental appeal and Cross Objection by assessee
are directed against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals), Chandigarh
dated 08.04.2013 for assessment year 2007-08.
2. The ld. CI T(Appeals) noted that penalty was imposed on
disallowance of the interest. The ld. CIT(Appeals) further noted
that quantum addition has been deleted by the Tribunal vide
order dated 27.04.2012 in I TA 650/CHD/2011. The ld. 2
CIT(Appeals), therefore, noted that since quantum addition has
been deleted, penalty is not leviable and accordingly, allowed the
appeal of the assessee.
3. We have heard ld. DR and the assessee in person. The
departmental appeal has no merit because once quantum
addition has been deleted by the Tribunal, nothing survives in
favour of the revenue for levy of penalty against the assessee.
4. The assessee in the Cross Objection prayed that appeal of
the department may be dismissed. It is also time barred. Since,
departmental appeal is dismissed, therefore, the Cross Objection
of the assessee stands infructuous and no further interference is
called for in the matter.
5. In view of the above discussion, the departmental appeal
and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30 t h April,2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
(T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 30 t h April,2015. 'Poonam' Copy to:
The Appellant, The Respondent, The CI T(A), The CI T,DR
Assistant Registrar, I TAT Chandigarh
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