Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Prasad International Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD BENCH " C "
Before Shri MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER and
Shri D.C. AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Date of hearing : 29.4.11 Drafted on: 29.4.11
ITA No.3090/Ahd/2010
Assessment Year : 2007-08
The ACIT (OSD) Vs. Prasad International Ltd.
Circle-5 601/2, Suryarath
Ahmedabad Opp.White House
Panchvati, Ahmedabad
PAN/GIR No. : AAACP 9394 B
(APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by : Shri Rignesh K.Das, D.R.
Respondent by: Shri J.M. Trivedi
ORDER
PER SHRI MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
This is an appeal at the behest of the Revenue which has emanated from the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals)-XVI, Ahmedabad dated 01/09/2010 and the only substantive ground is in respect of deletion of penalty of Rs.2,43,000/- levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act.
2. Facts is brief as emerged from the corresponding penalty order passed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act dated 13/03/2009 and assessment order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 26/12/2006 were that the assessee-company is in the business of manufacturing and export of chemical, dyes, and pigments. The only reason for the imposition for the impugned penalty was on account of alleged wrong claim of ITA No.3090/Ahd/2010 ACIT vs. Prasad International Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -2- deduction u/s.80HHC of the I.T.Act. The explanation of the assessee was that the deduction u/s.80HHC was claimed on the basis of a Certificate on Form No.10CCAC issued by a Chartered Accountant. However, the AO was not convinced and penalty was imposed. When the matter was carried before the first appellate authority, ld.CIT(A) has followed a decision pronounced in assessee's own case by the Tribunal in quantum appeal and on that basis deleted the penalty. Relevant paragraph reproduced below:-
"2.1. In the penalty order, the AO has stated that the assessee had filed its return of income on 30/10/2004 and the assessment was completed under section 143[3] whereby the deduction under section 80HHC has been reduced from Rs.863845 to Rs.182711 and the penalty under Sec. 271(1)(c) was initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income thereby concealing the income. The Learned CIT(Appeals) has confirmed the addition and therefore a show-cause notice was issued as to why the penalty be not levied. The assessee replied to the AO that the deduction was claimed on the basis of the certificate given by the chartered accountant in Form No.10CCAC and therefore the claim was bona fide. The assessee further stated that in their own case on similar issue for A.Y. 2000-01, the ITAT has deleted the penalty in ITA No.2761/AHD/2005 read with Miscellaneous Application No.210/AHD/2008. The AO did not accept this explanation and stated there was loss and after reducing from that 90% of export incentive, the assessee had claimed deduction under section 80HHC of Rs.863845. When there is negative business profit the deduction is not available and in this regard the AO relied on several decisions of various High Court. He therefore, levied the penalty for making the wrong claim leading to concealment of income."ITA No.3090/Ahd/2010
ACIT vs. Prasad International Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -3- ....
"2.3. In have considered the submission made by the appellant and observation of the AO. It is clear that the honorable ITAT has allowed assessee's appeal and deleted the penalty under Se.271(1)(c) for assessment year 2000-01 as stated above. The facts in current year are same and hence following the decision of honorable ITAT in the appellant's own case the penalty for this year is also deleted."
3. On hearing the submissions of both the sides, we have noticed that in assessee's own case for A.Y.2000-01 a penalty u/s.271(1)(c) was deleted by the Respected Co-ordinate Bench "D" Ahmedabad in ITA No.2761/Ahd/2005 order dated 22/08/2008 titled as Prasad International Pvt.Ltd. vs. ITO in the following manner:-
"2. At the time of hearing, on behalf of the assessee, Shri J.M.Trivedi, appeared and produced copy of the decision of the ITAT Ahmedabad "D" Bench in ITA No.1482/Ahd/2004 dated 29-7-2008 for A.Y. 2000-2001 in the assessee's own case, wherein the Tribunal restored the issue regarding computation of deduction under Secti9on 80HHC, back to the file of AO. Learned counsel of the assessee further contended that the assessee claimed deduction under Section 80HHC on the basis of certificate in Form No.10CCAC issued by the Chartered Accountant. In these circumstances, on account of difference of opinion, no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is leviable. For this reliance was placed on the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deep Tools Pvt., 274 ITR 603 and contended that facts of the assessee are ident6ical with that of Punjab and Haryana High ITA No.3090/Ahd/2010 ACIT vs. Prasad International Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -4- Court (supra), therefore, levy of penalty by the AO and sustained the same by the CIT(A) be cancelled."
4. Respectfully following the above decision as also considering the circumstances of the case, we hereby uphold the view taken by the ld.CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of the Revenue.
5. In the result, Revenues' appeal is dismissed.
Order signed, dated and pronounced in the Court on 29/ 4 /2011.
Sd/- Sd/-
( D.C. AGRAWAL) ( MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT )
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad; Dated 29/ 04 /2011
T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Assessee.
2. The Department.
3. The CIT Concerned
4. The ld. CIT(Appeals)-XVI, Ahmedabad
5. The DR, Ahmedabad Bench
6. The Guard File.
BY ORDER,
स×याǒपत ूित //True Copy//
(Dy./Asstt.Registrar), ITAT, Ahmedabad ITA No.3090/Ahd/2010 ACIT vs. Prasad International Ltd.
Asst.Year - 2004-05 -5-
1. Date of dictation.......................29.4.11
2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 29.4.11.................. Other Member.....................
3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S.................
4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement......
5. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S......29.4.11
6. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk.................. 29.4.11
7. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk..................................
8. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order..........................
9. Date of Despatch of the Order..................