MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13 , NEW DELHI

ITA 1619/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2014 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI SMC BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1619 /DEL/201 8 [ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 00 6 - 07 ] MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD VS. THE A.C. I . T . 2042, KATRA TAMBACCO, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 13 KHARI BAOLI, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI PAN : A AACM 0118 Q [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 0 6 . 0 9 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 .0 9 .2018 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SURESH KUMAR GUPTA , CA REVENUE BY : S HRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SR. DR ORDER PER N .K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS] - XXVI , N EW DELHI DATED 09 .0 2 .201 8 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 6 - 0 7 . 2 2. THE SOLITARY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT]'. 3. THE ROOT FOR LEVY OF PENALTY LIE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 153A OF THE ACT. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT UNDER THE HEAD FREIGHT EXPENSES, THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED A SUM OF RS. 47,87,272/ - AS CASH PAYMENT EXCEEDING RS. 20,000/ - ON DAY TO DAY BASIS AND, THEREFORE, HAS VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ACCORDINGLY, DISALLOWED 20% OF RS. 47,87,272/ - AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 9,57,454/ - . 5. THE ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PREFER ANY FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3 6. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED IN ACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE ASKING IT TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY PENALTY SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 7. THE ASSES SEE FILED DETAILED REPLY STRONGLY OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED LEVY OF PENALTY. THE ASSESSEE STRONGLY CONTENDED THAT IT HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME NOR HAS CONCEALED ANY INCOME AND, THEREFORE, NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE. 8. EXPLANATIO N OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO LEVIED PENALTY OF RS. 3,22,279/ - . 9. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS . 10. BEFORE ME, THE LD. AR REITERATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOW ER AUTHORITIES. 4 11. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 12. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE U/S 40A(3) OF THE ACT. I FIN D THAT THERE IS NO ALLEGATION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE CONCEALED ANY PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHED ANY INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME THEREOF. THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE U/S 40A( 3) OF THE ACT WAS ONLY BASED ON THE PARTICULARS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, ON THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I DO NOT FIND IT TO BE A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DIRECTED TO DE LETE THE PENALTY SO LEVIED. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 1619 /DEL/201 8 IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07. 0 9 .2018 . SD/ - [N.K. BILLAIYA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 07, SEPTEMBER , 2018 VL/ 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 0 6 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 ATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 0 6 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 0 6 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 0 6 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 0 6 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS 0 7 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 1 0 . 0 9 . 2 0 1 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER