M/s. Commitment Mortality Vision Education Society, Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1489/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3718 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIDHI SRIVASTAVA
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Document seized; Assessment record; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 133A; 132; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1489 TO 1495/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 TO 2013-14 COMMITMENT MORTALITY VISION EDUCATION SOCIETY, A-22, MAIN GALI, KUNDAN NAGAR, LAXMI NAGAR, DELHI. PAN: AAAAC1679A VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MS NIDHI SRIVASTAVA, CIT, DR DATE OF HEARING : 26.08.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.08.2019 ORDER PER BENCH: THE ABOVE BATCH OF APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 09.01.2017 OF THE CIT(A)-24, NEW DELHI RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2013-14, RESPECTIVELY. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, ALL THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. ITA NOS.1489 TO 1495/DEL/2017 2 2. THE ASSESSEE IN ALL THESE APPEALS HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING THE PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- EACH LEVIED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE IT ACT. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. THEREFORE, ALL THESE APPEALS ARE BEING DECIDED ON T HE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 4. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A TRUST. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OU T IN THE CASE OF FIITJEE GROUP OF CASES BY THE INVESTIGATION WING, NEW DELHI ON 17 TH DECEMBER, 2012 AND A SURVEY U/S 133A WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE INVESTIGATIO N WING ON THE ASSESSEE TRUST AT THE PREMISES SITUATED AT 2D, MIG FLATS, GULABI BAGH , DELHI. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT ON 25 TH MARCH, 2014. SUBSEQUENTLY, ANOTHER NOTICE U/S 142(1) WAS ISSUED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER ON 12 TH AUGUST, 2014 REQUESTING FOR COMPLIANCE BY 20 TH AUGUST, 2014. ANOTHER NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT ALONG WITH A QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ISSUED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER ON 22 ND AUGUST, 2014 REQUESTING FOR COMPLIANCE BY 1 ST SEPTEMBER, 2014. AGAIN, ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014, THE DATE FIXED AT THE REQUEST OF T HE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLICATION REQUESTING FOR TIME TO PREPARE AND S UBMIT DOCUMENTS OF ONE MONTH. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED TIME TILL 22 ND SEPTEMBER, 2014. SINCE THERE WAS NON- COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED, ANOTHER NOTICE U/ S 142(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 7 TH OCTOBER, 2014 REQUESTING FOR COMPLIANCE BY 15 TH ITA NOS.1489 TO 1495/DEL/2017 3 OCTOBER, 2014. AGAIN, ANOTHER NOTICE U/S 142(1) WA S ISSUED ON 12.11.2014 ALONG WITH NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY AN ORDER IMPOSI NG PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) SHOULD NOT BE MADE. AGAIN THERE WAS NON-COMPLIANCE . THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THROUGHOUT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE THE DETAILS CALLED FOR IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE. HE, THEREF ORE, GAVE A FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, VIDE NOTICE DATED 5 TH FEBRUARY, 2015. HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREAFTER, ISSUED NOTICE U/ S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT, VIDE NOTICE DATED 19 TH FEBRUARY, 2015 AND ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE ITS REPLY BY 2 ND MARCH, 2015. THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER IN RESPON SE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND LEVIED PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE IT ACT. SIMILAR PENALTY HAS BEEN LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR OTHER YEARS. 5. IN APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY S O LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4.1.5 A READING OF THE FACTS AS RECOUNTED IN THE T ABLE ABOVE, MAKES IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN STONEW ALLING THE PROCEEDINGS OF ASSESSMENT AND HAS CONSISTENTLY EVADED TO GIVE QUES TIONS TO THE DETAIL QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 22.08.2014 ,WHICH CONTAINED QUE STIONS ASKING FOR SPECIFIC DETAILS, INCLUDING QUERIES ABOUT THE SO CALLED SCHO LARSHIP FUNDS WHICH HAVE BEEN GIVEN FROM THE APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNTS TO M/ S FIIT JEE LTD., IT SOURCE AND MODE OF PAYMENT, AND OTHER DETAILS. THIS PARTIC ULAR SET OF TRANSACTIONS FORMS THE ONLY TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN APPELLANT AND M /S FIITJEE, AND WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ENQUIRY BY THE A.O.. APART FROM S TATING THAT THESE TRANSACTIONS WERE DONE BEHIND ITS BACK AND THAT ITS OWN BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN MISUSED BY FIITJEE, THE APPELLANT HAS DELIBERATELY AVOIDED TO THROW ANY FURTHER LIGHT ON THE SUSPICION TRANSACTIONS. BY DOI NG SO, IT HAS AVOIDED SCRUTINY ITA NOS.1489 TO 1495/DEL/2017 4 OF THE TRANSACTIONS BY WAY OF A SERIES OF ADJOURNME NT PETITIONS AND A SERIES OF LETTERS CONSISTENTLY OBJECTING TO ASSUMPTION OF JUR ISDICTION, EVEN AFTER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PROVIDED A COPY OF SATISFACTI ON NOTE TO IT. IT IS NOT THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, NOR THE RIGHT OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE A.O. MUST FULLY SATISFY THE APPELLANT THAT INITIATION OF PROC EEDINGS U/S 153C HAS BEEN VALIDLY MADE, BEFORE THE APPELLANT DEIGNS TO FURNIS H REPLIES TO SPECIFIC QUESTIONS REGARDING ITS ACCOUNTS. IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY AVOIDING TO RESPOND TO THE SPECIF IC QUESTIONS AND THUS HAMPERING INVESTIGATION BY THE A.O. EVEN THE LETTER S DATED 18.02.2015 AND 16.02.2015, WHICH IT CLAIMS IN ITS WRITTEN SUBMISSI ONS AS HAVING BEEN SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ( PURPORTING TO CONTAIN REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONS RAISED IN THE FIRST QUESTIONNAIRE) BEARS NO PROOF OF THE SUBMISSION/DESPATCH BEFORE THE A.O. THESE SO-CALLED RESPONSE IS NOT AVAILABLE ON THE ASSESSMENT RECORD, NOR WAS A HEARING CONDUCT ED ON THAT DAY. RELIANCE ON SUCH LETTERS APPEARS TO BE AFTERTHOUGHT AND CR AFTED SPECIALLY TO WRIGGLE OUT OF THE PENALTY LEVIED ON IT FOR NON-COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE U/S 142(1). EVEN OTHERWISE, THE-APPELLANT HAS NOT RESPONDED TO QUERI ES OF THE A.O. RAISED VIDE DATED 23.12.2014 AND 05.02.2015. UNDER THESE CIRCUM STANCES, 1 AM OF THE FIRM VIEW THAT THE A.O. HAS RIGHTLY LEVIED PENALTY U/S 2 71 (1)(B) FOR NON-FURNISHING OF THE INFORMATION CALLED FOR U/S 142(1). I THEREFO RE CONFIRM THE LEVY OF PENALTY. 6. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASS ESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERI AL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THERE WAS NO PROPER COMPLI ANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE VARIOUS STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FROM TIME TO TIME FOR WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENA LTY OF RS.10,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER A PPEAL. WE FIND THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY SO LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE REASONS FOR WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE PRECEDING PARAG RAPHS. ALTHOUGH NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, A PERUSAL OF TH E RECORD SHOWS THAT IT IS THE ALLEGATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THERE WAS NO PROPER COMPLIANCE TO THE ITA NOS.1489 TO 1495/DEL/2017 5 STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM FOR WHICH HE LEVIED PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEA RS. IT IS OBSERVED FROM PARA 4.1.1 (II) AND (III) THAT THE ASSESSEE, BEFORE THE CIT(A), HAS SUBMITTED AS UNDER:- (II) IT IS WRONG AND UNJUSTIFIED ON PART OF THE A. O. TO ISSUE VAGUE LETTERS WITHOUT PROPER VERIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. VIDE LETTER DATED 20.11.2014 THE APPELLANT HAS REQUESTED THE A. O. FOR PROVIDING CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE SATISFACTION NOTE (FOR ISSUE OF NOTIC E U/S 153C) AND THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS. AFTER RECEIVING THE SAME, THE APPELLANT HAS IMMEDIATELY MADE COMPLIANCE VIDE LETTER DATED 18.02.2014. (III) THE COMPLIANCE TO NOTICES DATED 12.11.2014, 2 4.11.2014, 12.12.2014, 16.12.2014, 23.12.2014, 02.01.2015 AND 19.01.2015 W AS FULLY MADE VIDE APPELLANTS LETTERS DATED 20.12.2014, 04.12.2014, 11.12.2014, 16.12.2014, 01.01.2015, 19.01.2015 AND 28.02.2015 FOR WHICH COM PLIANCE WAS MADE ON 16.02.2015. THUS IT HAS MADE ALL THE COMPLIANCE. 8. FURTHER, IT IS NOT DISCERNIBLE FROM THE RECORD A S TO WHETHER THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED U/S 143(3) OR 144 OF THE IT ACT. T HE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT FOR NON- COMPLIANCE TO THE STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED FROM TIM E TO TIME. HOWEVER, A PERUSAL OF THE PENALTY ORDER SHOWS THAT NOTICE U/S 142(1) O F THE ACT WAS ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS ON T HE SAME DATE. THE VARIOUS OTHER NOTICES WERE ALSO ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER O N THE SAME DATES. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THE IN TEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)( B) ONLY FOR ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E., ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ONLY IS JUSTIFIED. W E, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE PENALTY FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2007-08. AS MENTIONED EARLIER SINCE ALL THE STATUTORY NOTICES ARE ISSUED FOR OTHER YEARS ALSO ON THE VERY ITA NOS.1489 TO 1495/DEL/2017 6 SAME DATE, THEREFORE, TAKING A LENIENT VIEW, WE DEL ETE THE PENALTY SO LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) FOR T HE REMAINING YEARS. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IS DISMISSED AND THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REMAINING ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE ALLOWED. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 9.08.2019. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACC OUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 29 TH AUGUST, 2019 DK COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI