2020 (7) TMI 15

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short]. 2. We heard the parties and perused the records. The assessee is engaged in the business of dealing in jewellery and bullion. A search u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the hands of the assessee on 2.9.2010. Consequent thereto, the assessments for the years under consideration were completed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act making additions on the following heads: a) Addition on account of revaluation of closing stock. b) Addition of gross profits made outside the books. c) Excess stock found at the time of search. The additions mentioned in (a) & (b) were made in all the 7 years and the addition mentioned in (c) was made in assessment year 2011-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The appellant has filed detailed submission in support of its grounds of appeal. The appellant also submitted that since the Hon'ble ITAT has deleted all the quantum additions for all these years on the basis of which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) were imposed, the penalty orders are not sustained at this stage. The appellant has submitted on this point as under: "6.1 It is submitted that the additions made by the Learned A.O. in the assessment proceedings have since been deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellate orders passed in ITA No.2534 to 2539/Bang/2017 dated 17.8.2018 (Annexure-6), for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2010-11 & by the order in ITA No.585/Bang/2014 dated 21.8.2018 (Annexure- 7), for the A.Y. 2011-12. Thus, as a re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Since, penalties are held to be non sustainable on above account, other contentions raised by the appellant in grounds of appeal are not adjudicated." 5. The revenue is aggrieved by the decision of Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. D.R. submitted that the revenue has challenged the decisions rendered by ITAT by filing appeals before Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. Accordingly he submitted that the issues have not attained finality and hence the Ld CIT(A) should not have deleted the penalties. 6. On the contrary, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the impugned penalties are liable to be deleted since the additions made in the assessment order in all the seven years have since been deleted by the ITAT. Hence the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting th....