Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Kaveri Infrastructure (P) Ltd, New ... vs Dcit, New Delhi on 4 April, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH 'D' NEW DELHI
BEFORE Mr. J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
Mr. KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 641/Del/2015
Assessment Year: 2005-06
M/s Kaveri Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. DCIT CC-6
B-14, Kaveri House, Geetanjali Vs. New Delhi
Enclave, New Delhi
PAN: AABCK7148K
(Appellant) (Respondent)
ITA No. 642/Del/2015
Assessment Year: 2006-07
M/s Kaveri Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. DCIT CC-6
B-14, Kaveri House, Geetanjali Vs. New Delhi
Enclave, New Delhi
PAN: AABCK7148K
(Appellant) (Respondent)
ITA No. 643/Del/2015
Assessment Year: 2007-08
M/s Kaveri Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. DCIT CC-6
B-14, Kaveri House, Geetanjali Vs. New Delhi
Enclave, New Delhi
PAN: AABCK7148K
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. R.S. Singhvi & Sh. Satyajeet Goel, CA
Respondent by Sh. Vijay Verma, CIT DR
Date of hearing 04.04.2018
Date of pronouncement 04.04.2018
2
ITA Nos.641/Del/2015, 642/Del/2015 & 643/Del/2015
ORDER
PER KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER.:
These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 pertaining to the assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08.
2. Since the similar grounds were raised in all these appeals. All the appeals were taken up together and are being disposed of by way of consolidated order.
3. First of all, we take up the assessee's own appeal in ITA No. 641 pertaining to AY 2005-06. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
(1) i. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in confirming penalty of Rs. 3,11,87,961/- on the alleged ground of concealment/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.
ii. That various additions and disallowances being subject matter of dispute are based on change of opinion and are also not in conformity with provisions of section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
iii. That the penalty has been imposed without recording proper satisfaction and application of mind.
2. That even otherwise, mere addition or disallowance could not be the basis for concealment as all the particulars relating to the additions and disallowances were part of record and as such there is no case of concealment / furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.
3. That the penalty order is not justified on facts and same is bad in law.
4. That appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and delete any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the penalty as levied cannot be sustained in view of the fact that in quantum 3 ITA Nos.641/Del/2015, 642/Del/2015 & 643/Del/2015 proceedings, the Tribunal has deleted the addition in ITA No. 881/Del/2012. This fact is not controverted by the learned DR.
5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The AO has imposed penalty in respect of the various disallowances i.e. disallowance on account of rejection of claim of deduction u/s 80IA. The transactions carried out by Shri. V.K. Kataria cash received from D.D. and Mr. Vijay. The payments made to the Delhi Jal Board officials and expenditure related to Project Consultancy and Technical Support. The assessee has furnished the chart which is reproduced as below:-
S. Ground Penalty order CIT(A) Order (Penalty) ITAT Order Remarks N (Quantum) o.
1. Disallowance of claim of Page 1, Paral Finding: Page 28, Para 4.1 Page 36, para Claim of deduction u/s 80IA Conclusion: Page 33, Para 60 Conclusion deduction u/s 4.3 page 29, para 80IA accepted 50
2. Addition of unexplained Page 1, Para2 Finding: Page 35, Para 4.9 Page 36, para Issue restored cash transactions(Rs. Conclusion: Page 35, Para 61 Conclusion back to the file 33,42,000/-) 4.9 page 38, para of AO 64
3. Addition of unexplained Page 1, Para3 Finding: Page 35, Para 4.9 Page 36, para Issue restored cash transactions(Rs. Conclusion: Page 35, Para 61 Conclusion back to the file 11,71,000/-) 4.9 page 38, para of AO 64
4. Disallowance of Site Page 1, Para4 Finding: Page 35, Para 4.9 Page 36, para Disallowance expenses u/ s 37(1) Conclusion: Page 35, Para 60 Conclusion Deleted 4.9 page 22, para 39
5. Disallowance of Project Page 1, Para5 Finding: Page 33, Para 4.5 Page 36, para Disallowance consultancy and Conclusion: Page 35, Para 60 Conclusion Deleted technical support 4.7 page 22, para expenses 38
6. Adhoc disallowance of Page 2, Para 6 Finding: Page 35, Para 4.8 Page 36, para Disallowance site labour expenses Conclusion: Page 35, Para 60 Conclusion deleted 4.8 page 13, para 21 &22
6. Since the additions have been deleted or restored to the file of the AO. The Revenue has not rebutted the facts stated in the chart. Moreover, the ld. counsel for the assessee has taken us through the decision of the Tribunal in 4 ITA Nos.641/Del/2015, 642/Del/2015 & 643/Del/2015 ITA No. 881/Del/2012. Under these facts, the penalty levied on these amount amounts would not be sustained. Therefore, we direct the AO to delete the penalty.
7. Now, we take up ITA No. 642/Del/2015. Facts are identical as in ITA No. 641/Del/2015. The assessee has also furnished the chart for AY 2006-07 which is as under:-
S. Ground Penalty order CIT(A) Order (Penalty) ITAT Order Remarks No. (Quantum)
1. Disallowance of Project Page 1, Para 2 Finding : Page 23, Para Page : 45 para : 74 Disallowance consultancy expenses 4.3 Conclusion: Page Conclusion : page Deleted 26, Para 4.4 46 Para 77
2. Disallowance of Project Page 1, Para 3 Finding: Page 23, Para Page 45, para 74 Disallowance consultancy and 4.3 Conclusion: Page Conclusion page Deleted technical support 26, Para 4.4 48, para 81 expenses
3. Disallowance of Site Page 1, Page 4 Finding : Page 26, Para Page 51, para 87 Disallowance expenses u/s 37(1) 4.5 Conclusion : Page Conclusion page Deleted 28, Para 4.6 51, para 88
4. Adhoc disallowance of Page 1, Para 5 Finding: Page 28, Para Page 49, para 83 Disallowance site labour expenses 4.7 Conclusion: Page Conclusion page Deleted 29, Para 4.8 50, para 86
8. Since the additions have been deleted or restored to the file of the AO. The Revenue has not rebutted the facts stated in the chart. Moreover, the ld. counsel for the assessee has taken us through the decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 882/Del/2012. Under these facts, the penalty levied on these amount amounts would not be sustained. Therefore, we direct the AO to delete the penalty.
9. Now, we take up ITA No. 643/Del/2015. Facts are identical as in the above two appeals. The assessee has also furnished the chart for AY 2007- 08 which is as under:-
5ITA Nos.641/Del/2015, 642/Del/2015 & 643/Del/2015
S. Ground Penalty order CIT(A) Order (Penalty) ITAT Order Remarks No. (Quantum)
1. Disallowance of Site Page 1, Para 2 Finding : Page 22, Para Page 55, para 92 Disallowance expenses u/s 37(1) 4.1 Conclusion: Page Deleted 22, Para 4.2
2. Disallowance of Project Page 1, Para 3 Finding: Page 22, Para Page 55, para 92 Disallowance consultancy and 4.1 Conclusion: Page Deleted technical support 22, Para 4.2 expenses
3. Adhoc disallowance of Page 1, Page 4 Finding : Page 22, Para Page 55, para 92 Disallowance site labour expenses 4.1 Conclusion : Page Deleted 22, Para 4.2
10. Since the additions have been deleted or restored to the file of the AO.
The Revenue has not rebutted the facts stated in the chart. Moreover, the ld. counsel for the assessee has taken us through the decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 883/Del/2012. Under these facts, the penalty levied on these amount amounts would not be sustained. Therefore, we direct the AO to delete the penalty.
11. In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 641/Del/2015, 642/Del/2015 & 643/Del/2015 are allowed.
Pronounced on 4th day of April, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/-
(J.S. REDDY) (KUL BHARAT)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dt. 04.04.2018
SH
6
ITA Nos.641/Del/2015, 642/Del/2015 & 643/Del/2015
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR,
ITAT NEW DELHI
Date
1. Draft dictated on PS
2. Draft placed before author .4.2018 PS
3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM
4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM/AM
5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS .4.2018 PS/PS
6. Kept for pronouncement on PS
7. File sent to the Bench Clerk .4.2018 PS
8. Date on which file goes to the AR
9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
10. Date of dispatch of Order.