The General Manager, Bahraich V. Additional Commissional of Income Tax, GONDA

ITA 122/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83345 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: S K ARORA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 273B; 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.122/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006 - 07 SHRAVASTI KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD. NANPARA, DISTT. BAHRAICH. PAN:AAAAS4522Q VS. ADDL. C.I.T., GONDA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI S. K. ARORA, C.A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI VIVEK MISHRA, CIT, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 06/08/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 7 /09/2014 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 21/12/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 2007. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) - II LUCKNOW HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.385000.00 IMPOSED BY THE A.O. U/S. 271D OF I.T. ACT 1961 2. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ALSO ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF A.O. IN INITIATING THE PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S. 271D FOR VIOLATION OF SECTION 269 SS ON THE BASIS OF REVENUE AUDIT PARTY OBJECTION WHICH IS BAD IN LAW WHEN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS FINALIZED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF IT ACT'1961. 2 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CR AVES, LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR VARY FROM THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT OR BEFORE THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 3. LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS WHICH WERE RAISED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. REGARDING THE REPLIES FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF THE SAME IS AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 58 TO 60 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 61 TO 64 OF THE PAPER BOOK. 4. LEAR NED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT THE ONLY EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED EARNEST M ONEY FROM THE CONTRACTORS IN CASH IN UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS CONTRACTORS ARE ILLITERATE WHO REACHED THE FACTORY FOR DEPOSIT OF EARNEST MONEY AT THE LAST MINUTE FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE TENDER AND FOR THE REASON THAT THE DAY BEFORE THE TENDER BEIN G SUNDAY ETC. THESE ARE GENERAL SUBMISSIONS WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT /RULES AS PER WHICH , NO PENALTY IS IMPOSABLE FOR SUCH VIOLATION. ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED IN SECTION 269SS IS THAT BOTH THE DEPOSITORS AND THE PERS ON RECEIVING THE DEPOSIT ARE HAVING AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND NEITHER OF THEM HAVE ANY INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER THIS ACT. THIS IS NOT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS CASE IS FALLING UNDER THIS EXCEPTION. AS PER THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 273B OF THE ACT, NO PENALTY IS IMPOSABLE U/S 271D OF THE ACT IF THE ASSESSEE CAN ESTABLISH THAT FOR THE FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO FOLLOW THE METHOD OF RECEIVING LOAN OR DEPOSIT U/S 269SS, THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR HIS 3 FAILURE. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT ESTABLISH ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR ASSESSEES FAILURE AND THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 6. 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/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 7 /09/2014. *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