9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te that as the quantum addition has been restored to the AO for fresh decision, the penalty imposed relating thereto was rightly cancelled by the Ld. CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 5063/DEL/2013 - - - Dated:- 26-8-2015 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, JJ. For The Department : Md. Mohsin Alam, CIT(DR) For The Assessee : S h. Ajay Wadhwa, CA, Ms. Aruna, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM Revenue has filed this appeal against the Order dated 3.6.2013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I), New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2007-08. 2. The grounds raised by the Department read as under:- 1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. 2. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore the Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the contention raised by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal. 7. On the contrary, Ld. Counsel of the assessee relied upon the order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority and stated that in this case since the quantum deleted/ set aside by the ITAT and therefore, penalty does not survive. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has correctly appreciated the legal position by deleting the penalty following the order of the ITAT dated 17.5.2012 on quantum additions. He further stated that the Department has filed a frivolous appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) knowing well that quantum has already been decided by the ITAT. He p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... direction to decide the same after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing in this regard. We note that as the quantum addition has been restored to the AO for fresh decision, the penalty imposed relating thereto was rightly cancelled by the Ld. CIT(A). 8.2 In the background of the aforesaid discussions and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that in the present case, the penalty under section 271(l)(c) is not leviable and it deserves to be deleted, hence, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the penalty made by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), accordingly, we uphold the same and decide the issue against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
