Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7483 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
6 month(s) 26 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
16-07-2018
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
SMC
Assessment Year
2013-2014
Appeal Filed On
21-12-2017
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES SMD, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1683/CHD/2 017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S TILOK TIRATH VIDYAWATI CHUTTANI VS THE ITO (E XEMPTION), CHARITABLE TRUST, SCO 52-54, CHANDIGARH. SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH. PAN : AAATT1724E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KULTEJ SINGH BAINS, ADDL. C IT DATE OF HEARING : 10.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.07.2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2017 OF CIT(A)-2 CH ANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND : 1)THAT LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS )-2, CHANDIGARH HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND HAS THEREBY ERRED IN SUSTAINING PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST ON INCOME TAX REFUND. THE APPELLANT IS A TRUST AND THE INCOME IS EXEMPT. THE DEFAULT WAS UNINTENTIONAL AS THE REFUND WAS CREDITED TO THE BANK AND THE APPELLA NT WAS UNAWARE OF THE INTEREST COMPONENT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT IS PRAYED THAT ORDER OF LEA RNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2 MAY KINDLY BE CANCELLED. 2. BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN HEARD. RELEVANT FACTS OF T HE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST REGISTERED U/S 12A(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 RETURNED NIL INCOME. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED RS. 71,963/- AS INTEREST U/S 244A ON REFUND WHICH HAD NOT BEEN TAKEN INTO INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACC OUNT. A PERUSAL OF PARA 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS STATED BY THE COUNSEL THAT INTEREST AMOUNT WAS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT INADVERTENTLY AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AMO UNT WAS NOT UTILIZED OTHER THAN FOR THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE AO HOLDING; HOWEVER, AFTER DISCUSSION, COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AGR EED ITA 1683/CHD/2017 A.Y.2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 FOR ADDITION OF RS. 71,963/- TO THE RETURNED INCOME FOR TAXATION PURPOSES. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) WERE IN ITIATED. THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THAT IT WAS AN INADVERTENT MISTAKE. THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AO WERE REITERATED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND ON FAILING TO GET RELIEF, WERE REPEATED BEFORE THE ITAT. THE LD. AR RELYING UPON THE ORDERS SUBMITTED THAT CONSISTENTLY THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A CLAIM OF INADVERTENT MISTAKE. THE OMISSION WAS INADVERTENT. IT WAS ALSO HIS SUB MISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A HABITUAL DEFAULTER. IN THE CIRCUMS TANCES, IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT PENALTY MAY BE QUASHED. 5. THE LD. SR.DR RELIES UPON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT HABITUAL DEFAU LTER, AND NOTING THE CONSISTENT CLAIM OF INADVERTENT, UNINTENTIONAL MIST AKE WHERE THE ASSESSEE PLEADS THAT HE WAS UNAWARE OF THE INTERES T COMPONENT CREDITED TO HIS BANK ACCOUNT, WE FIND NO GOOD REASON TO DISCARD HIS EXPLANATION OFFERED. ACCEPTING THE SAME TO BE BONAFIDE AND TRUE, THE PENALTY ORDER IS DIRECTED TO BE QUASHED AND THE IMPUGNE D ORDER, ACCORDINGLY, IS SET ASIDE. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN TH E OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.07.2018. SD/- SD/- (DR.B.R.R.KUMAR) ( DIVA SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.
