TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1673X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be sustained. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 1099/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 6-2-2019 - SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Ved Jain, Adv, Shri Ashish Goyel, CA For the Respondent : Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY Challenging the orders dated 29/12/2014 in appeal number 46/CIT(A)(C)/GGN/2013-14 on the file of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Gurgaon, ( Ld. CIT(A) ) whereunder the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty levied by the learned assessing officer for the assessment years 2011-12, Revenue preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adeep Aggarwal the surrendered amount was 22 crores and the penalty was 2.2 crores. Ld. AR submitted that but for the change in these figures all the facts are identical in the cases of both the brothers. By producing the copies of the assessment order, penalty order, order of the Ld. CIT(A) and that of a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No. 1 100/del/2015 in the case of Pradeep Aggarwal, Ld. AR submitted that in the case of Pradeep Aggarwal also Ld. C1T(A) deleted the penalty and the order of the Ld. C1T(A) is upheld by a coordinate Bench of this Tribunal by order dated 15/10/2018 in ITA No. 1 100 /Del/ 2015. 1 le therefore squarely relied on the reasoning and conclusions of the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Prad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... crossings infrastructure Ltd vs. CIT (Central) 222 taxman 26 and the decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sudhir Jain in ITA No. 575 of 2013. 7. Ld. Cff(A) on a consideration of the facts involved in this case, found that these facts are covered by various decisions of the Delhi benches of the Tribunal in the case of Sitaram Gupta vs. ACIT in ITA No. 1835 and 1836 of 2013, Nceraj Singhal vs. ACIT in 146 ITD 152, M/s Spaze tower private limited vs. DC IT in ITA No. 2296/del/2012 and the decisions of Chandigarh Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Munish Kumar Goyal 45 taxmann.com 563, ACIT vs. Gian Chand Gupta in ITA numbers 1005 to 1007/Chd/2013 etc. By following the said decisions Ld. CIT(A) directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
