Shikha Singh, Kolkata V. ACIT, CIR-25, KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 1289/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1548 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHISH BAJAJ ACA

Judgement Text

, A , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH A KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1 2 88 - 1290 / KOL / 2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS :2004-05 TO 2006-07 SHIKHA SINGH C/O D.J SHAH & CO. KALYANA BHAVAN, 2, ELGIN ROAD, KOLKATA-20 [ PAN NO.APKPS 6207 G ] V/S . ACIT, CIRCLE-25, 2, GARIHAT ROAD, KOLKATA-19 /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY ASSESSEE SHRI ASHISH BAJAJ, ACA /BY RESPONDENT SHRI SALLONG YADEN, ADDL. CIT-DR !'# /DATE OF HEARING 14-08-2017 $% # /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 13-09-2017 / O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- ALL THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE D IRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS)-7, KOLKATA, WHEREIN HE HAS CONFIRMED THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). 2. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THAT GR OUND NO.5 OF ALL THE THREE APPEALS READS AS FOLLOWS:- ITA NO.1288/KOL/2015 5. FOR THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE PENALTY ORDER U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT 1961 WAS BAD IN LAW FOR WAN T OF SPECIFIC CHARGE FOR IMPOSITION OF THE PENALTY AND HENCE THE SAID ORDER BE CANCELLED. ITA NO.1289/KOL/2015 5. FOR THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE PENALTY ORDER U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT 1961 WAS BAD IN LAW FOR WAN T OF SPECIFIC CHARGE FOR IMPOSITION OF THE PENALTY AND HENCE THE SAID ORDER BE CANCELLED. I TA NO.1290/KOL/2015 ITA NO.1288-1290/KOL/2015 A.YS. 04-05 TO 06- 07 SHIKHA SINGH VS. ACIT, CIR-25 KOL. PAGE 2 5. FOR THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE PENALTY ORDER U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT 1961 WAS BAD IN LAW FOR WAN T OF SPECIFIC CHARGE FOR IMPOSITION OF THE PENALTY AND HENCE THE SAID ORDER BE CANCELLED. 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED COPIES OF NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 274 R.W.S. 271 OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS. NONE OF THE COLUMNS IN THESE NOTICES HAVE BEEN STRUCK OFF BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ONLY THE NAME AND ADD RESS OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARS AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SIGNED WITHOUT FILING OF ANY OF THE BLANKS OR STRIKING THEM OFF THE NOTICE. THUS, THE SPECIFIC CHARGE, AS TO WHETHER THE PENALTY IS IMPOSED TO BE LEVIED FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FOR FURNI SHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME, HAS NOT BEEN SPECIFIED IN THIS NOTICE. 4. THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MANJUNATHA COTTON AND FACTROY VS. CIT 259 ITR 565 (KAR) HELD THAT PENALTY CANNOT BE LEVIE D WHEN THE CHARGE FOR WHICH IT IS PROPOSED TO BE LEVIED IS NOT SATISFIED IN THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 274 R.W.S. 271 OF THE ACT. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COUR T IN THE CASE OF M/S VEERABHADRAPPA SANGAPA & OTRS. VS. CIT AND C IN SLP (S) 13898 OF 2014 JUDGMENT DATED 11.07.2016 CONFIRMED THIS DECISION. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE BINDING OF THIS JUDGMENT WE QUASH THE PENALTY LEVIED IN ALL THESE THREE APPEALS. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE AR E ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 13/ 09/2017 SD/- SD/- (') (#) (N.V.VASUDEVAN) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP, SR.P.S )!*+- 13 / 09 /201 7 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /ASSESSEE-SHIKHA SINGH, C/O D.J. SHAH & CO. KALYAN BHAVAN , 2, ELGIN RD. KOL-20 2. /REVENUE-ACIT, CIRCLE-25, 2, GARIHAT ROAD, KOLKATA-19 3.*3*4 5 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 5- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5.89:''!4 , 4 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6.:<=>? / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, HEAD OF OFFICE/DDO 4 ,