Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Ito, Chennai vs V.R.Global Energy Pvt. Ltd., Chennai on 9 April, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'बी' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'B' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, या यक सद य एवं
ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद य केसम&
BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3363/Chny/2018
नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year : 2012-13
M/s VR Global Energy Pvt. Ltd.,
The Income Tax Officer, v. II Floor, Temple Tower,
Corporate Ward - 3(4), 62, Anna Salai, Nandanam,
Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 035.
PAN : AABCT 3716 E
(अपीलाथ,/Appellant) (-.यथ,/Respondent)
अपीलाथ, क/ ओर से / Appellant by : Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
-.यथ, क/ ओर से / Respondent by : Sh. Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate
सन
ु वाई क/ तार ख/Date of Hearing : 01.04.2019
घोषणा क/ तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 09.04.2019
आदे श /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -11, Chennai, dated 27.09.2018 deleting the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer 2 I.T.A. No.3363/Chny/18 under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
2. Shri B. Sagadevan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that this Tribunal confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer on merit. However, on appeal by the assessee, the High Court allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition made on quantum. According to the Ld. D.R., the Revenue has already filed an appeal before the Apex Court against the judgment of Madras High Court, therefore, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in deleting the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act.
3. On the contrary, Sh. Saroj Kumar Parida, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the High Court by its judgment dated 24.08.2018 deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the quantum appeal. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, there cannot be any levy of penalty, hence, the CIT(Appeals) has rightly deleted the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer.
4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. This Tribunal 3 I.T.A. No.3363/Chny/18 confirmed the orders of the lower authorities in quantum appeal. Therefore, the Assessing Officer levied the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. On appeal by the assessee against the quantum addition made by the Assessing Officer before the High Court, the appeal of the assessee was allowed and the addition was deleted. Consequently, the CIT(Appeals) deleted the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer by the impugned order. Now the Revenue claims that an appeal has already been filed before the Apex Court and the same is pending. However, the fact remains that as on today, the quantum addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted by the High Court and it is not case of the Revenue that the judgment of the High Court is stayed by the Apex Court. In those circumstances, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(Appeals) has rightly deleted the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass a fresh order of assessment in case the Apex Court reverses the judgment of the Madras High Court.
5. With the above observation, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.
4 I.T.A. No.3363/Chny/18
Order pronounced in the court on 9th April, 2019 at Chennai.
sd/- sd/-
(ए. मोहन अलंकामणी) (एन.आर.एस. गणेशन)
(A. Mohan Alankamony) (N.R.S. Ganesan)
लेखा सद य/Accountant Member या यक सद य/Judicial Member
चे नई/Chennai,
th
5दनांक/Dated, the 9 April, 2019.
Kri.
आदे श क/ - त6ल7प अ8े7षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ,/Appellant
2. -.यथ,/Respondent
3. आयकर आय9 ु त (अपील)/CIT(A)-11, Chennai
4. Principal CIT-3, Chennai
5. 7वभागीय - त न ध/DR
6. गाड( फाईल/GF.