Radhey Shyam, Rewari V. ITO, Ward-2, Rewari

ITA 1176/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2575 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE S H. N. K. BILLAIYA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1 176 /DEL/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 3 - 1 4 SH. RADHEY SHYAM SHOP NO.236 REWARI HARYANA PAN ASTPS8517M VS ITO WARD - 2 REWARI HARYANA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. R AJESH JAIN, CA RESPONDENT BY MS. AASHNA PAUL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 05/11 /2 0 18 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06 / 1 1 /2018 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: T HIS APPEAL BY THE ASSE SSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), ROHTAK DATED 26.12.2017 PERTAINING TO A. Y. 2013 - 14. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT. 2 3. THE ROOTS FOR THE LEV Y OF PENALTY LIE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.02.2016 FRAMED U/S 143 (3) OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT SOME CASH HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPI NION THAT THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.28.85 LACS IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH PNB BANK, GURGAON REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT AND INITIATED THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR CONCEALMENT OF THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. 4. ACCORDINGLY NOTICE U/S 274 R/W SECTION 271 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE IT WAS A PROFORMA NOTICE WITHOUT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONING WHETHER THE PROPOSED PENALTY IS FOR CONC EALMENT OF INCOME OR F OR FILING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. PENALTY OF RS.819231/ - WAS ACCORDINGLY LEVIED. EVEN IN THE PENALTY ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND FURNISHED INACCURATE PA RTICULARS OF INCOME. THIS MEANS THAT EVE N AT THE TIME OF LEVYING THE PENALTY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SURE WHETHER IT IS A CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V S. SSA EMERALD MEADOWS VIDE ORDER DATED 05.08.2016 HAS HELD OMI S SION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXPLICITLY SPECIFY IN THE PENALTY NOTICE AS TO WHETHER PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE BEING INITIATED FOR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OR FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME MAKES THE PENALTY ORDER LIABLE FOR CANCELLATION . RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT (SUPRA) THE PENALTY SO LEVIED IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06 . 1 1 . 2 018. SD/ - ( N. K. BILLAIYA ) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER * NEHA* DATE: - 06 . 1 1 .2018 COPY F ORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(APPEALS) 5 . DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 06.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 06.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 06.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 06.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 06.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH T HE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/ PS 06.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 12.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. THE DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES T O THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 4 DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER 5