Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
V.S Inernational P.Ltd, Mumbai vs Dcit 4(3), Mumbai on 15 December, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH "F" MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND
SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
ITA No. 184/MUM/2016
Assessment Year: 2009-10
V.S. International Pvt. Ltd. ACIT-4(3)
A/204 Neelam Centre Hind Aayakar Bhavan M.K.
Cycle Road Mumbai- Vs. Road.
400018 Mumbai-400020.
PAN No. AAACV7292C
Appellant Respondent
Assessee by : None
Revenue by : Mr. Ram Tiwari, DR
Date of Hearing : 29/11/2017
Date of pronouncement : 15/12/2017
ORDER
PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M.
This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2009-10. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai and arises out of the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the 'Act').
2. The ground raised by the assessee in this appeal is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) confirming the penalty of Rs.47,11,010/- imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
V.S. International 2 ITA No. 184/Mum/2016
3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee-company filed its return of income for the AY 2009-10 on 30.09.2009 declaring total income of Rs.1,80,26,654/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment u/s 143(3) on 21.12.2011 making an addition of Rs.1,38,60,000/- on account of bonus/commission paid to the Directors.
Then the AO levied a minimum penalty of Rs47,11,010/- on the addition of Rs.1,38,60,000/- made by him in the assessment order. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the above penalty levied by the AO and thus dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
4. The case was fixed for hearing before the Tribunal on 26.10.2017 and 29.11.2017. We find that neither the assessee nor his authorized representative appeared before the Tribunal on the above dates. However, the Director of the company files a copy of the order of the ITAT 'F' Bench, Mumbai in assessee's own case for the same assessment year and states that the quantum appeal filed by the assessee has been allowed and therefore, the penalty levied by the AO be deleted.
The Ld. DR does not dispute the deletion in the quantum appeal by the ITAT of the disallowance of Rs.1,38,60,000/- made by the AO.
5. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the relevant materials on record. We find that in the quantum appeal (ITA No. 1581/Mum/2013) for the same assessment year, the ITAT 'F' Bench, Mumbai has deleted the disallowance made by the AO on account of performance bonus paid to the Directors amounting to Rs.1,38,60,000/-.
V.S. International 3 ITA No. 184/Mum/2016 As the addition of Rs.1,38,60,000/- made by the AO has been deleted by the Tribunal, the minimum penalty of Rs.47,11,010/- imposed on the above amount does not survive. Thus the same is deleted.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 15/12/2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(SAKTIJIT DEY) (N.K. PRADHAN)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai;
Dated: 15/12/2017
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A)-
4. CIT
5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. Guard file.
BY ORDER,
//True Copy//
(Dy./Asstt. Registrar)
ITAT, Mumbai