Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1208 (ITAT-PANAJI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
28-11-2016
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
DB
Next Hearing Date
28-11-2016
Assessment Year
2011-2012
Appeal Filed On
03-08-2016
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 159 TO 162 /PNJ/201 6 (ASST. YEAR : 2011 - 1 2 ) 1) MR. MOHSIN KHAN, H.NO. 2730, MURIDA, FATORDA, MARGAO GOA. PAN NO. AFMPK 7696 D VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI - GOA 2) MR. AZIM KHAN H.NO. 2730, MURIDA, FATORDA, MARGAO GOA. PAN NO. APFPK 1542 M 3) MR. IMRAN KHAN, H.NO. 2730, MURIDA, FATORDA, MARGAO GOA. PAN NO. ANQPK 3181 K 4) MR. ANISH KHAN, H.NO. 2730, MURIDA, FATORDA, MARGAO GOA. PAN NO. AFNPK 30436 H (APPELLANT S ) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANDIP BHANDARE C A DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAVIRAJ Y. V. - D R DATE OF HEARING : 28 / 1 1/2016 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 / 1 1 /201 6 . O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES AGAINST THE ORDER S OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PANAJI - 2 IN APPEAL NO S . 2 ITA NO S . 159 - 162 /PNJ/201 6 71/CIT(A) - 2/PNJ/2014 - 15, DATED 02/05/2016 IN THE CASE OF MR. MOHSIN KHAN ; 69/CIT(A) - 2/PNJ/2014 - 15, DATED 02/05/2016 IN THE CASE OF MR. AZIM KHAN ; 70/CIT(A) - 2/PNJ/2014 - 15, DATED 02/05/2016 IN THE CASE OF MR. IMRAN KHAN ; AND 72/CIT(A) - 2/PNJ/20147 - 15, DATED 02 /05/2016 IN THE CASE OF MR. ANISH KHAN , ALL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 . 2. SHRI SANDIP BHANDARE, CA REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES AND SHRI RAVIRAJ Y.V. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVE N UE. 3 . IT WAS SUBMITTED BY DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE T HAT THE ASSESSEES WERE INDIVIDUALS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF SHRI SOUMIT RANJAN JENA , THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE S WERE ALSO SEARCHED ON 12/10/2010. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT GOLD JEWELLERY TO AN EXTENT OF 3476.24 GRAMS WAS FOUND . AS NONE OF THE ASSESSEES WERE ABLE TO PRODUCE ANY BILLS FOR PURCHASE OF THE JEWELLERY , AN AMOUNT TO THE EXTENT OF 20,36,226/ - WAS OF FERED TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEES, WHO WERE BROTHERS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT CONSEQUENTLY PENALTY HAD BEEN LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT . IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT ON APPEAL , COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD CONFIRMED TH E LEVY OF PENALTY. 4 . IN REPLY , AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE FOUR ASSESSEES WERE RESIDING IN THE JOINT FAMILY ALONG WITH THEIR FATHER AND MOTHER. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT A PERUSAL OF THE SEIZURE PANCHANAMA CLEARLY SHOWED THAT THE JEWELLERY WERE FOUND IN VARIOUS PLACES REPRESENTING THE BED ROOMS OF THE BROTHERS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT EACH OF THE BROTHERS HAD CONFIRMED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH THAT JEWELLERY WAS RECEIVED BY THEM IN THE COURSE OF THEIR MARRIAGES AND WAS ALSO PURCHASED OUT OF THEIR EARNINGS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE STATEMENT HAD BEEN RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) 3 ITA NO S . 159 - 162 /PNJ/201 6 OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO DISCLOSED THE AMOUNT OF 20,36,226/ - AND OFFERED BY THEM IN THE COURSE OF STATEMENT RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) WHEN THEY HAD FILED THEIR RETURNS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE RETURNS HAD BEEN FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 AND IT WAS ONLY RETURNED INCOME WAS ASSESSED . IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT TH E RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ITSELF IN THE RANGE OF NEARLY 2.90 CRORES AND ABOVE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN EACH OF THE CASES, THE SO - CALLED UNDISCLOSED INCOME , WHICH HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX WAS IN THE NATURE OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME REPRESENT ING JEWELLERY WAS TO THE EXTENT OF 4.50 LAKHS . IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ADDITION ITSELF WAS FAR LESS THAN EVEN 10% OF THE INCOME DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE RETURNED INCOME HAD BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT NO PENALTY WAS LIV I ABLE . IT WAS THE SUBMI SSION THAT IT IS ONLY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE ANY BILLS AND VOUCHERS IN RESPECT OF JEWELLERY FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH THAT AN ADHOC DISCLOSURE HAD BEEN MADE AND THE INCOME OFFERED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE PENALTY LEVIED MAY B E CANCELLED . 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 IS LAST YEAR OF THE SEARCH , INSOFAR AS SEARCH TOOK PLACE ON 12/10/2010. THE RETURNED INCOME ON 29/03/2011 IN THE CASE OF MOHSIN KHAN IS TO THE EXTENT OF 2,93,02,747/ - AND UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY TO THE EXTENT OF 4,38,886/ - ; IN THE CASE OF AZIM KHAN THE RETURNED INCOME IS 2,93,90,562/ - AND THE UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY TO THE EXTENT OF 2,05,960/ - ; IN THE CASE OF IMRAN KHAN THE RE TURNED INCOME IS 2,95,11,450/ - AND THE UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY IS OFFERED AT 4,48,164/ - AND IN THE CASE OF ANISH KHAN RETURNED INCOME IS TO THE EXTENT OF 2,96,43,631/ - AND THE UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY TO THE EXTENT OF 4,93,726/ - . C LEARLY THESE INCOMES OFFERED ARE PURELY 2 % - 3% OF THEIR RETURNED INCOME ITSELF. THE PERSONS , WHO ARE SUCH HAVING HIGH INCOME TO ASSUME THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE JEWELLERY WOULD 4 ITA NO S . 159 - 162 /PNJ/201 6 BE IMPROBABLE . J UST BECAUSE THEY WERE UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE BILLS FOR PURCHASE OF THE JEWELLER Y CANNOT BE DRAWN A PRESUMPTION THAT THE JEWELLERY IS UNEXPLAINED . H OWEVER, THE ASSESSEES THEMSELVES HAVE OFFERED THE SAID JEWELLERY AS THEIR INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS . THIS BEING SO AND THE SAME HAVING BEEN ACCEPTED IN THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3), WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS LEVIABLE IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE. HENCE, PENALTY AS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AS CONFIRMED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) STANDS DELETED. 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON MONDAY , THE 28 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER , 201 6 AT GOA . S D / - S D / - ( RAMIT KOCHAR ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 28 TH NOVEMBER, 201 6 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE ASSESSEE. A ) MR. MOHSIN KHAN B) MR. AZIM KHAN C ) MR. IMRAN KHAN D) MR. ANISH KHAN ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF H.NO. 2730, MURIDA, FATORDA, MARGAO GOA . 2 . THE REVENUE. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI - GOA 3 . THE PR. CIT, CENTRAL, B A NGALORE . 4 . THE CIT(A - 2, PANAJI GOA. 5 . THE D.R . 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., PANAJI
