9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1312X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e basis of the decision in quantum appeal which is before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and in accordance with law. We therefore without expressing our view on the merits of the case, restore the issue back to the file of ld.AO. Thus, grounds of assessee’s appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. - SP Nos.59,60 & 61/Ahd/2016 and ITA Nos.3252, 3253 & 3254/Ahd/2015 - - - Dated:- 23-6-2016 - SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessee by: Shri J.P. Shah, AR Revenue by: K. Madhusudan, Sr. DR ORDER PER BENCH: Assessee filed three Stay Petitions and also filed three appeals which are directed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad ident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter before the Appellate Authorities. Appellate Authorities confirmed the order of AO and thereby dismissed the appeal of the assessee. On the aforesaid denial of claim of deduction u/s.80IA (4) of the Act, AO vide order dated 31/12/2013 held that since the assessee was not a Developer but only a Work Contractor, it was not eligible for claiming deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act. By claiming itself to be a Developer instead of Work Contractor, assessee has wrongly claimed deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act and he was therefore of the view that assessee was liable for penalty in view of Explanation-1 of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and, accordingly, levied a penalty of ₹ 83,33,586/- Aggrieved by the penalty order, assessee carried the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evy of penalty. He thus supported the orders of the AO and ld. CIT(A). 3. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The issue in the present case is with respect to levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on the disallowance of claim of deduction made u/s.80IA(4) of the Act. We find that against the denial of claim of deduction u/s.80IB(4) of the Act, the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon ble Gujarat High Court and the Hon ble Gujarat High Court vide order dated 29/1/2014 in Tax Appeal Nos.831, 832 833 of 2013 has admitted the appeals of the assessee and substantial question of law before the Hon ble High Court in those appeals are as unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09-10, we therefore for the similar reasons stated hereinabove while deciding the assessee s appeal for AY 2007-08 in ITA No.3252/Ahd/2015 (supra) and for similar reasons allow the ground(s) for statistical purposes of assessee s appeals in AYs 2008-09 2009-10. Thus, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, assessee s appeals for AYs 2007-08, 2008-09 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. Before us, in the Stay Petitions that have been filed by Assessee, Assessee has prayed for stay of demand against the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Since the issue of levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for the three assessment years has been remitted back to the file of AO as per o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
