Woco Motherson Elastomer Ltd., New ... vs Department Of Income Tax

ITO Vs Woco Motherson Elastomer Ltd. Ward- 18(3) IIIrd Floor, F-7, Block B-1, Mohan Cooperative Industrial New Delhi Estate, Mathura Road New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACW5183B Assessee by : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjha, Sr. DR Revenue by : Sh. K.M.Gupta Adv. , Sh. Ankush Kuthiala C.A Date of Hearing : 04.06.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 04 .06.2015

ORDER

Per bench,

These appeals are filed by the Department against the separate orders of CIT(A)- XXI, New Delhi each dated 12/09/2013.

2. Common issues are involved and the appeals were heard

together, so these are disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake

of convenience and brevity. In I.T.A. No. 6272, the grounds raised by

the department read as under :-

2 ITA No. 6272-73/Del/2013

"Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts of the case in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 2,37,55,050/- imposed by AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act."

2. "The appellant craves, leave or reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal."

3. In I.T.A. No. 6273 for the A.Y. 2006-07 the grounds raised are

similar, the only difference is in the amount involved.

4. During the course of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee at

the very outset stated that the additions on the basis of which

penalties were levied by the A.O. u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961

(hereinafter referred to as the Act) have been deleted by the ITAT in

quantum appeals in ITA no. 6050 and 234/Del./2011 vide common

order dated 17.5.2013 for the assessment year 2005-06 and 2006-07.

Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rightly deleted the penalty levied by the

AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. In his rival submissions, the Ld. DR

although supported the orders of the AO but could not controvert the

above said contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.

5. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully

gone through the material available on the record. In the present case 3 ITA No. 6272-73/Del/2013

it is noticed that the A.O. levied the penalty for the reason that

exemption claimed u/s 10B of the Act had been denied, the said order

of the AO was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), however, the ITAT

vide common order dated 17.05.2013 in ITA No. 6050 and

234/Del./2011 held that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of

exemption u/s 10B of the Act and deleted the addition. Therefore the

addition on the basis of which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied by the

AO is not inexistence. On a similar issue, the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the case of K.C.Builders and Another Vs. ACIT (2004), 265 ITR

562, held as under :-

"Where the additions made in the assessment order on the basis of which penalty for concealment is levied, are deleted, there remains no basis at all for levying penalty for concealment and, therefore, in such a case no penalty can survive and the penalty is liable to be cancelled. Ordinarily, penalty cannot stand if the assessment itself is set aside."

6. In the present case also since the addition which was the basis for

levying levied in the penalty has been deleted. Therefore, we are of the

confirmed view that the Ld. CIT(A) was fully justified in deleting the

impugned penalties levied by the A.O. for the A.Y.'s 2005-06 and 2006- 4 ITA No. 6272-73/Del/2013

07 u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. Accordingly we do not see any merit in

these appeals of the Department.

7. In the result appeals of the department are dismissed.

(Order Pronounced in the Court on 04/06/2015)

Sd/- Sd/-

(George George K) (N. K. Saini) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 04 /06/2015 *Binita* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5.DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 5 ITA No. 6272-73/Del/2013

Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on 4/06/2015 2. Draft placed before author 4/06/2015 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member

4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member.

5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS

6. Kept for pronouncement on

7. File sent to the Bench Clerk

8. Date on which file goes to the AR

9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.

10. Date of dispatch of Order.