9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the Assessee as against the order dated 25/07/2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as "the Ld.CIT(A)" in short] arising out of the penalty order dated 17/08/2017 passed by the ITO, Ward-7(2)(3), Ahmedabad (AO) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. Facts of the case: 3. The assessee is an individual having interest on loans and income from house property as main source of income. The assessee filed her return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14 on 14-03-2014 declaring total income of Rs. 8,63,230/-. The case was selected for the scrutiny and the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firmed the penalty by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. The assessee filed an appeal before tribunal which confirmed the penalty vide order dated 31-10-2022 (ITA No. 2094/Ahd/2018 - for AY 2013-14) concluding that the assessee has consciously and continuously mis-represented the facts and furnished inaccurate particulars of her income. The assessee filed Miscellaneous Application (MA) in the said ITA No.2094/Ahd/2018. The Tribunal as per order dated 27-06-2024 passed in MA No.2/Ahd/2023 decided to recall the Tribunal's order dated 31/10/2022. 4.3. Now, therefore, the assessee is in appeal before us in the recalled matter with the following grounds: "1.1. The order passed u/s. 250 on 25.07.2018 for A.Y.2013-14 by CIT(A)-7, Abad uphol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld.CIT(A) has concluded that assessee has made patently wrong claims of deduction under sections 54F and 54EC of the Act. 7. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. We have noted the contents of decision of Co-ordinate Bench in quantum appeal as per ITA No.461/Ahd/2017 dated 11-10-2018, where the deduction u/s. 54F of the Act was restricted to Rs. 30,00,000/-. We also noted that the deduction u/s 54EC of the Act was not a ground for appeal in the said appeal before the Co-ordinate Bench. We further noted the contents of MA order which recalled the present appeal. The relevant part is reproduced for the sake of clarity: "14. It is clearly evident from the above that during the course of hearing, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly impermissible in law. There cannot be any case for penalizing the assessee for an offence which has been found to have not been committed at all, and therefore, the confirmation of penalty on this aspect i.e. on the addition which stood deleted by the ITAT, was in any case a mistake which was eligible for rectification under section 254(2) of the Act. It is a clear and apparent mistake, and the MA filed by the assessee needs to be allowed, which we hold so. We, therefore, of the view that present MA needs to be allowed. Accordingly, we allow the MA filed by the assessee. The order passed in ITA No.2094/Ahd/2018 dated 31/10/22 is recalled and the Registry is directed to list the above appeal of the assessee in the ordinary course o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
