Shri Somabhai Nanabhai Parmar, V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-7(1), Baroda

ITA 1319/AHD/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6215 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2007
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMIR TEKRIWAL SRDR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI D.K. TYAGI, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K.GARODIA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1319/AHD/2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004-05 DATE OF HEARING:20.6.11 DRAFTED:27.6.11 SOMABHAI NANABHAI PARMAR, E-1, SHAKTI PARK, DARODIA, DIST. BARODA 391 310 PAN NO.AFHPS9457D V/S. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), GEB BUILDING, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, BARODA 390 007 (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- WRITTEN SUBMISSION RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI SAMIR TEKRIWAL, SR-DR O R D E R PER D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COM MISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-VI, BARODA IN APPEAL NO.CAB/VI -204/06-07 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE AS HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUND:- 2. THE COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING P ART OF THE PENALTY ORIGINALLY LEVIED AT RS.22811/-. YOUR APPELLATE SUB MITS THAT THE PENALTY IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND PRAYS THAT THE SAME BE DELETED . 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE HA S FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,54,005/- WHICH WAS P ROCESSEDU/S.143(1). SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AN D SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT ITA 1319/AHD/2007 A.Y. 2004-05 SOMABHAI N PARMAR V. ITO WD-7(1), BRD PAGE 2 U/S.143(3) WAS COMPLETED DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCO ME AT RS.3,77,965/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSI NG OFFICER OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED ONLY RS.16,000/- AS INCO ME FROM MIS UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE DETAILS OBTAI NED FROM THE ASSESSEE REVEALED THAT ASSESSEE HAD OMITTED TO INCLUDE THE F OLLOWING INTEREST INCOME:- 1. INTEREST INCOME FROM IPCL CREDIT SOCIETY RS. 841/- 2. INCOME FROM MIS RS.43,200/- 3. SB ACCOUNT INTEREST RS.14,178/- 4. INCOME FROM VARISTHA PENSION BIMA YOJANA RS. 9,000/- 5 ADDITIONAL INTEREST ON PF RS. 8,818/- RS.76,037/- THE ASSESSEE ALSO ADMITTED TO THE SAID OMISSION AND AGREED TO THE ADDITION. THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE ACCORDINGLY INITIATED ON THIS AMOUNT AND PENALTY OF RS.22,811/- U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT, 1961 WAS LEVIED. 4. BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT INCOME FROM MIS INCLUDED INTER ALIA FOLLOWING:- 1. INCOME FROM MIS FOR SELF AND WIFE RS.32,000/- 2. INCOME FROM MIS OF SON RS.11,200/- 3. INCOME FROM VARISHTA PENSION BIMA YOJANA RS. 9,0 00/- IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT INCOME FROM MIS IN TH E NAME OF SON OF RS.11,200/- PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND THE INCOME OF RS.9,000/- FROM VASISTHA PENSION BIMA YOJANA WAS AL SO RECEIVABLE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN AUG.04 I.E. RELEVANT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. IT WAS FURTHER ARGUED THAT INCOME OF RS.11,200/- AND RS.9,000/- DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL AND THEREFORE NOT LIABLE FOR PENALTY U /S.271(1) OF THE ACT. IN RESPECT OF OTHER INCOME IT WAS CLAIMED THAT THE SAI D OMISSION WAS INADVERTENT AND THERE WAS NO INTENTION ON THE PART OF ASSESSEE TO CONCEAL THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. ITA 1319/AHD/2007 A.Y. 2004-05 SOMABHAI N PARMAR V. ITO WD-7(1), BRD PAGE 3 5. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THIS SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE LD. CIT(APPEALS) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELL ANT, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE PENALTY ORDER. THE CASE RECORD S WERE ALSO CALLED FOR AND THE MATTER WAS ALSO DISCUSSED WITH THE CONC ERNED ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS SEEN FROM THE CASE RECORDS THAT THE BANK PASSBOOKS OF VARIOUS MIS ACCOUNTS IN THE NAME OF SELF, WIFE AND SON WERE SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE CO PY OF VARISTHA PENSION BIMA YOJANA OF LIC WAS ALSO SUBMITTED. THES E DOCUMENTS CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE INCOME OF RS.11,200/- FRO M MIS IN THE NAME OF APPELLANTS SON AND THE INCOME FROM VARISTHA PENSIO N BIMA YOJANA OF LIC WERE NOT RELEVANT FOR A.Y. 2004-05 AND THUS THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW THEREFORE THE AMOUNT OF RS.20,200 (RS.11,200 + RS.9,000) IS NOT E XIGIBLE FOR PENALTY U/S.271(1). IN RESPECT OF THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS .55,837 (RS.76037 RS.20200) THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS JUSTIFIED IN L EVYING THE PENALTY U/S.271(1) AS PARTICULARS IN RESPECT OF SUCH INCOM E WERE NOT DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT CONCEALED THE PARTI CULARS OF SUCH INCOME AND NO REASONABLE CAUSE WAS MADE OUT FOR SUC H OMISSION. NEITHER ANY PLAUSIBLE REASON WAS SUBMITTED FOR SUCH OMISSION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THEREFORE DIRECTED TO REWORK T HE PENALTY AMOUNT ON THE CONCEALED INCOME OF RSS.55,837/-. 6. AT THE TIME OF HEARING ASSESSEE HIMSELF APPEARED BEFORE US AND RELIED ON THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY HIM. 7. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHER HAN D RELIED ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS). 8. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RECORD AND WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WE FIND THAT ASSESSING O FFICER HAS LEVIED THE PENALTY ON THE CONCEALED INCOME OF RS.76,037/.- AND LD. CIT(APPEALS) GAVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT ON THE AMOUN T OF RS.20,200/- PENALTY IS NOT LEVIABLE AS THIS AMOUNT DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE Y EAR UNDER APPEAL. IN RESPECT OF BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.55,837/- HE WAS OF THE OPIN ION THAT ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN LEVYING THE PENALTY AS THE ASSESSE E CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS ITA 1319/AHD/2007 A.Y. 2004-05 SOMABHAI N PARMAR V. ITO WD-7(1), BRD PAGE 4 OF INCOME AND NO REASONABLE CAUSE WAS MADE OUT FOR SUCH OMISSION. BEFORE US ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO GIVE ANY PLAUSIB LE REASON FOR THIS OMISSION. THEREFORE WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND THE SAME IS HEREBY UPHELD. THIS GR OUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 30/06/2011 SD/- SD/- (A.K.GARODIA) (D.K. TYAGI) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, DATED : 30/06/2011 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-VI, BARODA 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD