Commissioner Of Income Tax -Ii v. Manav Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.....opponent(S

O/TAXAP/484/2014 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 484 of 2014 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II....Appellant(s) Versus MANAV INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1MR TUSHAR P HEMANI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAHandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKERDate : 04/08/2014ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with O/TAXAP/484/2014 JUDGMENT the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), Dated : 29.11.2013, in IT(SS)A No. 314/Ahd/2012 for the A.Y. 2008-09, by which the learned Tribunal has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the Revenue, confirming the order passed by the learned CIT(A), deleting the penalty imposed under Section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, the Revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal to consider the following substantial question of law; “Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in upholding the order of the CIT(A) deleting the penalty of Rs.37,58,994/- levied u/s. 271AAA of the Act?” 2.Heard, Ms. Mauna M. Bhatt, learned Advocate for the appellant-Revenue, and Shri. Tushar Hemani, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent-assessee. Present Tax Appeal is ADMITTED to consider the aforesaid substantial question of law and as there is broad consensus between the learned Advocates for the respective parties to remand the matter to the learned Tribunal, present Tax Appeal is taken-up for final hearing, today. 3.At the outset, it is required to be noted that with respect to the amount of O/TAXAP/484/2014 JUDGMENT Rs.1,75,89,941/- quantum appeal is pending before the learned Tribunal and there is broad consensus between the learned Advocates for the respective parties that the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded to the learned Tribunal with a direction to decide the appeal against the order of penalty after the quantum appeal filed by the appellant-Revenue is decided by the learned Tribunal. Under the circumstances, the learned Advocates for the respective parties do not invite further reasoned order. Therefore, while allowing the present appeal and remanding the matter to the learned Tribunal and quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal, we are not passing any further reasoned order, as any observation by this Court may affect the case of the either of the parties before the Tribunal. 4.In view of the above broad consensus between the learned Advocates for the respective parties, as recorded herein above, present Tax Appeal is ALLOWED. The impugned judgment and order dated 29.11.2013, passed by the learned Tribunal is, hereby, quashed and set aside and the matter is REMANDED to the learned Tribunal to consider the aforesaid appeal afresh in accordance with law and on merits with a further O/TAXAP/484/2014 JUDGMENT direction that the aforesaid appeal shall be decided, only after the quantum appeal preferred by the appellant-Revenue is decided first by the learned Tribunal. It is made clear that we have expressed nothing with respect to the penalty imposed under Section 271AAA of the Act, in favour of either of the parties. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. (M.R.SHAH, J.) UMESH (K.J.THAKER, J)