Sub-Registrar Sadar, Jaunpur V. Joint Director of Income Tax (Intelligence & Criminal Investigation), Lucknow

ITA 105/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 10523714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 16-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.105/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011 - 12 JT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTELLIGENCE & CRIMINAL INV.) LUCKNOW. VS SUB - REGISTRAR, SADAR COLLECTORATE COMPOUND, JAUNPUR. PAN:ASFPS1547P (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) NONE APPELLANT BY SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, D.R. RESPONDENT BY 16/02/2015 DATE OF HEARING 17 /03/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - II, LUCKNOW DATED 30/10/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 2012. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. BECAUSE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AUTHORITIES BELOW IS BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT PROPER APPRECIATION OF FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. BECAUSE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER OBLIGATION TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF CIB CODE 001 WHICH IS BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT PROPER APPRECIATION OF FACTS OF THE CASE. THE C.I.B. CODE 001 CALLS REQUIRING A BANK OR BANKING INSTITUTION TO FURNISH INFORMATION IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSIT AGGREGATING TO TEN LACS RUPEES IN ANY SAVING ACCOUNT. THE SUB - REGISTRAR IS NOT A BANK HENCE THIS 2 CODE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE SUB - REGISTRAR. HENCE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFI ED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(C) WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED. 3. BECAUSE U/S 133(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT A PERSON IS REQUIRED TO FURNISH INFORMATION AS CALLED FOR WHEREAS THE SUB - REGISTRAR (A STATE GOVT. OFFICER) IS NOT A PERSON AS DEFINED U/S 2(32)(C) OF THE AT HENCE, PENALTY LEVIED U/S 272A(2)(C) AT RS.26,400/ - IS LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED. 4. BECAUSE THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 272A(2)(C) AT RS.26,400/ - IS THUS BAD IN LAW AND WITHOUT PROPER APPRECIATION OF FACTS OF CASE AND LIABLE TO BE CANCELL ED. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING IN SPITE OF NOTICE AND HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE WAS DECIDED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AS PER PARA 6 OF HIS ORDER, WHICH IS REPRODUCED BELOW FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE: - 6. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND RELEVANT FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE A.O.IN ASSESSMENT ORDER, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(C) OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.26,400/ - HAS BEEN IMPOSED BY A.O. IS JUSTIFIED, BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH REQUIRED INFORMATION WHICH WERE CALLED U/S 133(6) BY JT. DIT. ON EXAMINATION OF WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF ASSES SEE FILED DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IT HAS BEEN BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE THE INFORMATION TO JT. DIT WITHOUT REASONABLE AND JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE. SINCE THESE 3 INFORMATIONS WERE IN THE POSSESSION OF SUB REGISTRAR BEING HOLDING THE GOVERN MENT RESPONSIBLE POST. HE SHOULD HAVE MADE THE COMPLIANCE OF STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED I.T. DEPARTMENT LOOKING IN TO THE FACTS OF CASE THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.26,400/ - BY JT. DIT U/S 272A(2)(C) CANNOT BE CONSIDERED UNJUSTIFIED. THE PENALTY LEVY OF RS.26,4 00/ - BY JT. DIT WAS AS PER PROVISIONS OF IT LAW AND I FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY A.O. THUS LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.26,400/ - IS HEREBY CONFIRMED AND APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 6. FROM THE ABOVE PARA FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), WE FIND THAT A CLEAR FINDING IS GIVEN BY HIM THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE THE INFORMATION TO JT.CIT WITHOUT REASONABLE AND JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE. UNDER THIS SITUATION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUN IL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17 /03/2015 *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR