Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Asst Cit 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs Milton Plastics Ltd, Mumbai on 1 November, 2017
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण "एफ" यायपीठ मुंबई म।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3650/Mum/2015 ( नधारण वष / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Asst. CIT, Circle-2(2)(2), M/s. Milton Plastics Ltd. R. No. 545, Aayakar Bhavan, Asian Building, 4th Floor, R. बनाम/ M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Kamani Marg, Ballard Estate, Vs. Mumbai-400 001 थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. AAACM 4047 Q (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( यथ / Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. A. Khan यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Alpesh Paragbhai Lad सनु वाई क तार ख / : 18.10.2017 Date of Hearing घोषणा क तार ख / : 01.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement आदे श / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.:
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-5, Mumbai dated 31.03.2015 and pertains to assessment year 2008-09.
2. The grounds of appeal read as under:
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld.
CIT(A) erred in cancelling the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c), without appreciating that assessee had made 78% of its sales to associates concerns at 2 ITA No. 3650/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2008-09) Asst. CIT vs. M/s. Milton Plastics Ltd.
a discount of 12% with sole motive of evading payment of tax particularly because the associate concern was eligible for deduction u/s. 80-IB of the Act.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in cancelling the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c), without appreciating the fact that the quantum addition on account of selling goods to its associates concern at a discount of 12% had been upheld by the ld. CIT(A).
3. At the outset, in this case the learned counsel of the assessee submitted that this is an appeal relating to levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Rs.1,74,44,453 with reference to addition of Rs.5,68,14,843/- on account of the difference in price charged from sister concern. The learned counsel submitted that the quantum appeal with reference to which this penalty has been levied has already been decided in favour of the assessee by this tribunal in ITA No. 7120/Mum/2011 dated 01.09.2017.
4. Hence, the learned counsel pleaded that since the addition has already been deleted, the penalty levied does not survive.
5. Per Contra, the learned departmental representative accepted that the addition with reference to which this penalty has been levied has already been deleted by this tribunal, as above.
6. Accordingly, after careful consideration, we find that since the addition with reference to which this penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) has been levied and has already been deleted by the tribunal. The penalty levied with reference to the above addition also doesn't survive. Hence, the deletion of the penalty by the ld. CIT(A) is upheld. 3 ITA No. 3650/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2008-09)
Asst. CIT vs. M/s. Milton Plastics Ltd.
7. In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed प रणामतः राज व क अपील खा रज क जाती है ।
Order pronounced in the open court on 01.11.2017 Sd/- Sd/-
(C. N. Prasad) (Shamim Yahya)
या यक सद य / Judicial Member लेखा सद य / Accountant Member
मुंबई Mumbai; दनांक Dated : 01.11.2017
व. न.स./Roshani, Sr. PS
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आयकर आयु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)
4. आयकर आयु त / CIT - concerned
5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गाड फाईल / Guard File आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मंब ु ई / ITAT, Mumbai