Creative Printer Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1692/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4458 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 24-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R R MAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREEKANT S SHAH
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(3); 244A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER CREATIVE PRINTERS PVT. LTD. PLOT NO. 71, SOPAN KESAR INDUSTRIAL HUB, B/H SARAUDUAR HOTEL, MORAIYA, AHMEDABAD-382213 PAN: AAACC4965B (APPELLANT) VS DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY: SHRI R.R. MAKWANA, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SHREEKANT S. SHAH , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 27-09-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-09-202 1 /ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2014-15, ARISES FRO M ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-1, AHMEDABAD DATED 30-05-2018, IN PROCEEDIN GS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT TH E ACT. 2. THE SOLITARY GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT OF RS. 2,44,532/- ITA NO. 1692/AHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 I.T.A NO. 1692/AHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE NO CREATIVE PRINTERS PVT. LTD. VS. DY. CIT 2 3. THE RELEVANT FACT IS THAT ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS FINALIZED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 5 TH DECEMBER, 2016. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 6,61,995/- BECAUSE OF NOT SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 1,29,372/- IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVED U/S. 244A ON THE AMOUNT OF REFUND ISSUED W HICH WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE TOTAL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO I NITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE DETAIL ED PARTICULARS OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 6,61,995/- WAS SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, HOWEVER, AFTER REDUCING THE SAME OUT OF BUSINESS INCOME BECAUSE OF WRONG HEAD OF INCOME, INADVERTENTLY THE SAME REMAINED TO BE ADDED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. REGARDING INTEREST RECEIVED U/S. 2 44A OF THE ACT ON THE REFUND AMOUNT, ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THERE WAS NO BIFURCATION BETWEEN INTEREST AMOUNT AND PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF REFUND ISSU ED, THEREFORE, INTEREST PART COULD NOT BE SHOWN IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT AGREED WITH THE SUBMISSION OF THE A SSESSEE STATING THAT NON- DISCLOSURE OF AFORESAID INCOME WAS AN ACT OF FURNIS HING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HAS LEVIED PENALTY @100% TO THE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,44,532/-. 4. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS B EFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL HAS FURNISHED PAPER BOOK COMPRISING DETAILS AND COP IES OF DOCUMENTS I.T.A NO. 1692/AHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE NO CREATIVE PRINTERS PVT. LTD. VS. DY. CIT 3 PERTAINING TO THE ISSUE IN THE APPEAL FURNISHED BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT(A). REGARDING INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 6,61,995/- OF NOT SHOWING UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, THE LD. C OUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD ALSO FILED AUDITED ACCOUNT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2013- 14 AND AS PER PART A OF THE P & L A/C OF THE RETURN OF INCOME, INTEREST AMOUNT WAS DISTINCTABLY SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD OTHER INCOME VIDE NOTE NO. 21. HOWEVER, THE SAME COULD NOT BE ADDED IN THE IN COME FROM OTHER SOURCES AFTER REDUCING THE SAME FROM THE WRONG HEAD OF INCO ME SHOWN UNDER THE BUSINESS HEAD. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS FURTHER SUBMITT ED THAT THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF RS. 6,61,915/- WAS DULY SHOWN IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN FILED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND REFERRED PAGE NO. 30 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHEREIN IT IS NOTICED THAT INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 6,61,995/ - WAS REFLECTED UNDER THE HEAD OF OTHER INCOME. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BECAUSE OF WORKING PROBLEM IN THE SOFTWARE THE SAME INTEREST INCOME CO ULD NOT BE REFLECTED IN THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN RESPECT OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 1,29,373/- RECEIV ED U/S. 244A ON REFUND ISSUED, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE REF UND OF RS. 5,32,180/- WAS GRANTED BIFURCATION OF SAME BETWEEN PRINCIPAL AND I NTEREST WAS NOT GIVEN IN THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT. FURTHER, THERE WAS A MISTAKE IN THE INDIVIDUAL TRANSACTION STATEMENT COPY OF THE SAME P LACED AT PAGE NO. 57 OF THE PAPER BOOK AS THE SAME INTEREST AMOUNT WAS REFL ECTED AS FOUR TIMES ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESS EE HAS WRITTEN A DETAILED LETTER DATED 30-06-2016 ALONG WITH COPY OF THE INDI VIDUAL TRANSACTION STATEMENT FOR RECONCILIATION AND CLARIFICATION ON T HE AMOUNT OF INTEREST ON THE REFUND ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS AL SO ISSUED A NUMBER OF REMINDERS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CLARIFY THE E XACT AMOUNT OF REFUND I.T.A NO. 1692/AHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE NO CREATIVE PRINTERS PVT. LTD. VS. DY. CIT 4 ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, NO FEEDBACK WAS RE CEIVED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. DUE TO SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES THE IN TEREST COULD NOT BE REFLECTED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WITHOUT REITERATING THE FACTS AS ELABORATED ABOVE, THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAS LEVIED PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF FUR NISHING ACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF NOT DISCLOSING INTEREST INC OME OF RS. 6,61,995/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND ALSO N OT SHOWING INTEREST OF RS. 1,29,373/- RECEIVED UNDER SECTION 244A. AFT ER PERUSAL OF THE COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN AND FACTS REPORTED AS ABOVE AND C ONSIDERING THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF PRICE WATERHOUSE COOPERS (P.) LTD. VS. CIT, KOLKATA (2012) 25 TAXMAN .COM 400 (SC) AND DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. RELIANCE PETRO- PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC), IT IS DEMONSTRATED FROM THE FACTS REPORTED SUPRA IN THIS ORDER THAT THERE WAS A BONAFIDE AND INADVERTENT ERROR AS SUBSTANTIATED FROM THE DETAILS REFERRED IN PARA 5 OF THIS ORDER IN RESPECT OF NOT REFLECTING INTEREST INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. IN RESPECT OF INTEREST AMOUNT U/S. 244A O F THE ACT, THERE WAS NO BIFURCATION OF INTEREST AMOUNT AND PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF REFUND ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER IN THE INDIVIDUAL TRANSACTION ST ATEMENT THERE WAS A MISTAKE AS THE SAME AMOUNT OF INTEREST PAID ON REFUND AMOUN T WAS REFLECTED MULTIPLE TIMES (FOUR TIMES) PAID TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE ANY FEEDBACK AND CLARIFICATION ON THE ISSUE IN SPITE OF WRITTEN REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE REPEATEDLY. I N VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AS SESSING OFFICER IS NOT I.T.A NO. 1692/AHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE NO CREATIVE PRINTERS PVT. LTD. VS. DY. CIT 5 JUSTIFIED IN LEVYING PENALTY WAS NOT CLEARLY CLARIF IED TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, WE CONSIDER THAT DECISION OF LD. CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING IMPUGNED PENALTY IS NOT JUSTIFIED. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT T HE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE PENALTY. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30-09-2021 SD/- SD /- (MADHUMITA ROY) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 30/09/2021 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,