M/s Kranti Borewell, JAMNAGAR V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3 (1), JAMNAGAR

ITA 151/RJT/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0184 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D R CHHATRE
• Section: 27; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH E-COURT AT AHMEDABAD] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS. 150 & 151/RJT/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S. KRANTI BOREWELL, HIGHWAY ROAD, KALAVAD, JAMNAGAR PAN : AAFFK 2050 F VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3 (1), JAMNAGAR / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI CHETAN AGRAWAL, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.R. CHHATRE, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 24/08/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24/08/2016 / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- THE PRESENT TWO APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AT THE INSTANC E OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), JAMNAGAR DATED 06.07.2015 AND 30.10.2015 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. ITA NO.150/RJT/2016 IS A QUANTUM APPEAL WHICH HAS ARISEN OUT OF THE ASSESSME NT ORDER PASSED U/S 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961; WHEREAS, ITA NO.15 1/RJT/2016 HAS ARISEN FROM PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDERTAKEN U/S 271(1)(C) O F THE INCOME-TAX ACT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 2. FIRST WE TAKE ITA NO.150/RJT/2016, I.E., QUANTUM APPEAL. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS RETURN OF I NCOME ON 29.12.2006 DECLARING TOTAL LOSS OF RS.1,77,030/-. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ISSUED SIX NOTICES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT SOMEHOW THEY REMAINED UNCOMPLIED WITH. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED VARI OUS CLAIMS OF THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS. 150 & 151/RJT/2016 KRANTI BOREWELL VS. ITO AY : 2006-07 2 AND DETERMINED THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE A T RS.28,92,160/-. ON APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAD PLEADED THAT THOUGH NUMBER S OF OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT HIS TAX CO NSULTANT DID NOT RESPOND TO THE NOTICES OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS FACT WAS NOT BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO BY THE TAX CONSULTANT. THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THIS EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RECORDED A FINDING THAT THE ASSE SSEE FAILED TO SUBMIT ANY CIRCUMSTANCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SUPPO RT OF THE RETURN FILED BY HIM. 3. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THOUGH SOME NEGLIGENCE CAN BE ATTRIBU TED TO THE ASSESSEE IN PROSECUTING HIS INCOME-TAX PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE L D. REVENUE AUTHORITIES, ONCE NUMBER OF NOTICES BEING RECEIVED BY HIM HE SHO ULD HAVE VERIFIED AS TO WHY THE TAX CONSULTANT WAS NOT APPEARING. BUT, ON THE OTHER HAND, IF WE CONSIDER THE PUNISHMENT IN THE SHAPE OF TAX LIABILI TY ON THE TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.28,92,160/-, THEN IT WOULD SUGGEST THAT PUNIS HMENT IS DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN T HE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE GRANT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. WE SET ASIDE BOTH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND RESTORE ALL THESE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSE E SHALL CO-OPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBMIT THE REQUISITE DETAILS. ITA NO.151/RJT/2016 4. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT O RDER, THE PENALTY APPEAL IS DEPENDENT UPON THE ULTIMATE DETERMINATION OF THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW THIS APPEAL A LSO AND SET ASIDE THE ISSUE REGARDING VISITING THE ASSESSEE WITH PENALTY U/S 27 1(1)(C) TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WILL BE IN THE DISCRETIO N OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ITA NOS. 150 & 151/RJT/2016 KRANTI BOREWELL VS. ITO AY : 2006-07 3 TO INITIATE OR NOT TO INITIATE THE PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 24 TH AUGUST, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( RAJPAL YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 24/08/2016 *BIJU T. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , / DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, RAJKOT