M/s. Industrial Contractor, Anand V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-2, Anand

ITA 1127/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9576 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1127/AHD/2013 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-2009 M/S. INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTOR, PLOT NO.1006, PHASE-IV, GIDC, V.U. NAGAR .. APPELLANT PAN : AAAFI 7108 P VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 ANAND .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI , AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D ILEEP KUMAR , SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING 16/12/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03/02/2016 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I V, BARODA DATED 25.02.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, ON TH E FOLLOWING GROUND:- THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IV , BARODA ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING PENA LTY LEVIED BY INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, ANAND OF RS.92,370/- U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND TRADING OF CHE MICALS AND POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENTS AND TRADING OF IRON & STEEL. AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER, DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS, ON VERIFICATION OF ITS DETAILS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS (SMC) ITA NO. 1127/AHD/2013 M/S. INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTOR VS. ITO AY 2008-09 2 NOTICED THAT ASSESSEES BANKER INDIAN BANK - HAVE CREDITED INTEREST ON FDRS AMOUNTING TO RS.2,98,923/- ON 30.0 6.2007. AS PER ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT OFFE RED THE SAME FOR TAXATION FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND T HEREFORE, DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR NOT SHOWING THE INTEREST INC OME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AS PER ASSESSING OFF ICER, THE ASSESSEE HAD STATED THAT THE SAME WAS OFFERED FOR T AXATION IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR I.E. AY 2009-10. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAME AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR 2008-09, SINCE THE BANK HAD CREDITED THE INTEREST A MOUNT INTO THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNT AND DEDUCTED TAX AT SOURCE U /S 194A OF THE IT ACT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVI ED PENALTY OF RS.92,370/- U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 24.06.2011 AND THE SAME HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE C IT(A) VIDE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 25.02.2013. 2.1 THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE PENALTY IN Q UESTION IS LEVIABLE ON THE AMOUNT NOT DISCLOSED IN THE YEAR UN DER CONSIDERATION BUT IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. IT IS PE RTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY DISCLOSED THE AMOUN T OF RS.2,98,923/- (NET OF TDS) IN THE AY 2009-10 AS PER THE BANK STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE BANK TO THE ASSESSEE WHERE T HE SAID AMOUNT WAS CREDITED ON 21.04.2008. IT IS ALSO NOT I N DISPUTE THAT THE SAME AMOUNT HAD BEEN OFFERED TO TAXATION I N THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE, WITHOUT PREJ UDICE TO THE QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT SI NCE THE (SMC) ITA NO. 1127/AHD/2013 M/S. INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTOR VS. ITO AY 2008-09 3 AMOUNT WAS CLAIMED TO BE CREDITED IN THE YEAR RELEV ANT TO AY 2009-10 AND THE SAME WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION IN TH E SAME YEAR, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE PENALTY SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, I.E., AY 2 008-09. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO D ELETE THE PENALTY OF RS.92,370/- LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 3RD FEBRUARY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- (SHAILENDRA K. YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 03/02/2016 BIJU T., PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! ' ' # / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ' # ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &'( ! , ' ! , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. (- . / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !', / ITAT, AHMEDABAD