ATIQ AHMED,HAPUR V. ITO,WARD-2(3)(4), HAPUR

ITA 3674/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by Atiq Ahmed against the penalties and disallowances imposed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur, for various assessment years. The primary issues revolved around penalties for concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars under section 271(1)(c), and non-filing of tax audit report under section 271B for the year 2012-13. Additionally, for the years 2015-16 to 2017-18, a disallowance of 10% of meat purchases was contested. The Tribunal found that the penalties for the year 2012-13 were unjustified as the re-estimation of net profits did not automatically attract penal provisions. The delay in filing the tax audit report was also accepted as a reasonable cause, leading to the deletion of the penalty under section 271B. For the subsequent years, the Tribunal did not find specific defects in the purchases but upheld a general disallowance due to the failure to prove the genuineness of the transactions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40673 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K.M. GUPTA
• Section: 147; 271(1)(c); 271B

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI (SMC) BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORESHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3673 & 3674/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 With ITA Nos.3677, 3678 & 3679/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Atiq Ahmed, House No. 333, Bhamda Patti, Patthar Wala Kaun, Hapur, U.P. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur PAN : AIFPA8796G (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER The instant batch of five cases involves single assessee herein, namely, Atiq Ahmed. All other relevant details thereof stand tabulated as under: Sl. No. Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Order Appealed against 1. 3673/Del/2024 for A.Y. 2012-13 Atiq Ahmed Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur CIT(A)-NFAC Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065767179(1), dated 19.06.2024, involving proceedings under section 271(1)(c). 2. 3674/Del/2024 for A.Y. 2012-13 Atiq Ahmed Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur CIT(A)-NFAC Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065768563(1), dated Assessee by Sh. K.M. Gupta, Advocate Department by Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 23.12.2024 Date of pronouncement 23.12.2024 ITA Nos. 3673, 3674 and 3677 to 3679/Del/2024 2 | P a g e 19.06.2024, involving proceedings under section 271B. 3. 3677/Del/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16 Atiq Ahmed Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur CIT(A)-NFAC Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065762292(1), dated 19.06.2024, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144. 4. 3678/Del/2024 for A.Y. 2016-17 Atiq Ahmed Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur CIT(A)-NFAC Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065760447(1), dated 19.06.2024, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144. 5. 3679/Del/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18 Atiq Ahmed Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Hapur CIT(A)-NFAC Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065758480(1), dated 19.06.2024, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144. 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. 3. I now advert to assessee’s lead assessment year 2012-13 wherein he is aggrieved against the action of learned lower authorities levying sections 271(1)(c) and 271B proceedings imposing penalties of Rs.63,900/- and 1,50,000/-, on account of concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof and for non-filing of tax audit report, respectively. 4. The Revenue could hardly dispute in assessee’s 271(1)(c) penalty appeal that the learned Assessing Officer had re-estimated his net profits @ 0.7% and therefore, going by CIT vs. Reliance ITA Nos. 3673, 3674 and 3677 to 3679/Del/2024 3 | P a g e Petroproducts (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC), I delete the impugned penalty levied against the appellant and allow his case ITA No. 3673/Del/2024 in very terms as it is not each and every quantum addition which would attract the instant penal provision. 5. Coming to assessee’s second appeal ITA No. 3674/Del/2024 seeking to reverse section 271B penalty of Rs.1,50,000/-, imposed by learned lower authorities, it is noticed from the perusal of the assessment order itself dated 31.12.2019 that he had duly filed his belated tax audit report and therefore, it is an instance of delayed filing of tax audit report than that of non-filing thereof. I accordingly accept the assessee’s explanation stating the delay in filing of tax audit report on account of circumstances beyond its control and delete the penalty u/s. 271B amounting to Rs.1,50,000/-. This case ITA No. 3674/Del/2024 is allowed. 6. I now come to the assessee’s remaining three identical appeals in ITA Nos. 3677 to 3679/Del/2024 for assessment years 2015-16 to 2017-18 respectively wherein learned lower authorities have disallowed 10% of his meat purchases as non-genuine. ITA Nos. 3673, 3674 and 3677 to 3679/Del/2024 4 | P a g e 7. After vehement arguing on assessee’s legal grounds challenging validity of reopening proceedings, learned counsel does not press this issue. Rejected accordingly. 8. I now proceed to deal with the instant identical issue in all these three appeals wherein learned lower authorities have disallowed 10% of the purchases as non-genuine. It emerges that neither the assessee has been able to satisfactorily discharge his onus to proving genuineness of impugned meat purchases nor the department could pin point any specific defect therein. Faced with this situation, I hold that an estimated disallowance to Rs.1,00,000/- each in all these three appeals would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Ordered accordingly. Necessary computations shall follow. 9. This assessee’s appeals Nos. 3673 & 3674/Del/2024 are allowed and his remaining three appeals Nos. 3677 to 2679/Del/2024 are partly allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective files. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd December, 2024 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23 December, 2024. "