9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o as 'Act') pertaining to the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 and deleted the penalty of Rs. 5,20,62,232/-, Rs. 2,93,84,685/- respectively. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee for two assessment years, these appeals were clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common and consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 1311/Chd/2019, AY 2010-11. Brief facts of the case pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11 are that the assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs. 81,53,37,960/-. The AO passed assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act after making addition of Rs. 16,84,86,188/- on account of interest income from FDRs on RGCTP and J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. Against the said findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue has preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The Revenue has challenged the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on the following effective grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld, CIT(A) has erred in allowing appeal of the assessee without appreciating the facts of the case. 2. On the Facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by holding the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c) dated 14.12.2018 infructuous without deciding the appeal on merits and by simply holding that the Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in ITA No. 736/Chd/2018 for A.Y, 2010-11 & ITA No. 737/Chd/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by following the order of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in assessee's own case for assessment year 2007-08. 6. We have perused the material available on record in the light of the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. We have also perused the order dated 22.05.2019 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, whereby the Coordinate Bench has set aside the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act and affirmed the action of the AO in dropping penalty proceedings against the assessee. As pointed out by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, since the Tribunal has set aside the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act, directing the AO to initiate penalty proceedings, the order passed by the AO has become void ab initio. Hence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
