RAMAKANT SHARMA, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

CO 9/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5611 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C GUPTA JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Tax effect
• Section: 271(1)(c); 50C

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH A, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKWO] U;KF;D LNL; ,O A JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM CROSS OBJECTION NO. 09/JP/2017 (ARISING OUT OF VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 173/JP/2017 ) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2007-08. SHRI RAMAKANT SHARMA S/O SHRI RAMESH CHAND SHARMA, 1, VIMAL KUNAJ, VIDYUT NAGAR, BEHIND BHARAT PETROL PUMP, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(5), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO. BJRPS 5130 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI K.C. GUPTA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 28.11.2019 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02/12/2019. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.12.2016 OF LD. CIT (APPEALS)-1, JAIPUR ARISING F ROM THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND LAW A LSO LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES GROSSLY ERRED IN LEVYING AND CONFIRMING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR RS. 5,02,000/-. ACTION OF LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES IS UNJUST, ILLEGAL & CONTRARY TO THE FACT & LAW OF THE CASE. 2 C.O. NO. 09/JP/2017 SHRI RAMAKANT SHARMA, JAIPUR. 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS CROSS OBJECTION WAS CALLED FOR HEARING. IT TRANSPIRED FROM THE RECORD THAT DESPITE REPEATED NOTICES SENT THROUGH RPAD, NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE. EARLIER, THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE USED TO APPEAR AND TOOK ABOUT 10 ADJOU RNMENTS. THEREAFTER, ON 3 RD SEPTEMBER, 2019 THE LD. A/R SOUGHT TO WITHDRAW HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY DUE TO NON- COOPERATION OF THE ASSESSEE. THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWED HIM TO WITHDRAW THE POWER AND CONSEQUENTLY NOTICE THROUGH RPAD WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THREE SUBSEQUENT HEARINGS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND TO THE REPEATED NOTICES ISSUED. ACCORDINGLY, THIS CROSS OBJECTION IS TAKEN UP FOR H EARING AND ADJUDICATION EX PARTE. 3. THE AO LEVIED THE PENALTY OF RS. 26,24,400/- UND ER SECTION 271(1)(C) VIDE ORDER DATED 29 TH JULY, 2015. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE SAID ACTI ON OF THE AO BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). THE LD. CIT (A) WHILE PASS ING THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS DELETED THE PART PENALTY AGAINST THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. THUS A PART R ELIEF WAS GRANTED BY THE LD. CIT (A) TO THE ASSESSEE AND CONSEQUENTLY BOTH THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE IN ITA NO. 173/JP/2017 WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 21.0 8.2019 DUE TO LOW TAX EFFECT AS PER THE MONETARY LIMITS PROVIDED VIDE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 17 OF 2019. IN THE CROSS OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE PENALTY CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT (A) TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 5,02,000/- OUT OF THE TOTAL AMOUN T OF RS. 26,24,400/-. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND FOUND THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME AND THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE AO IN THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER S ECTION 147/148 OF THE IT ACT, 3 C.O. NO. 09/JP/2017 SHRI RAMAKANT SHARMA, JAIPUR. THEN THE NON-FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE WOULD AMOUNT TO CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. CIT (A) IS JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY AT LEAST TO THE EXTENT OF NO N-DISCLOSURE OF THE TRANSACTION AND DECLARATION OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, WE D O NOT FIND ANY MERIT OR SUBSTANCE IN THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02/12/2019. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKWO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 02/12/2019. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI RAMAKANT SHARMA, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-THE ITO WARD 3(5), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {C.O. NO. 09/JP/2017} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR