Shri Ashokkumar Y. Yadav, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(1), Now Ward 7(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1733/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5889 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANTONY PARIATH
• Assessee Lawyers: PF JAIN
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

, ,LK ,LK,LK ,LK- -- -,E ,E,E ,E- -- -LH LHLH LH IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD LOZJH IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K] YS[KK LNL; ,OA EGKOHN LOZJH IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K] YS[KK LNL; ,OA EGKOHN LOZJH IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K] YS[KK LNL; ,OA EGKOHN LOZJH IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K] YS[KK LNL; ,OA EGKOHN IZL KN] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{KA IZLKN] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{KA IZLKN] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{KA IZLKN] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{KA BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 1733/AHD/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) SHRI ASHOKKUMAR Y. YADAV, 406, 4 TH FLOOR, OPP. AMBEDKAR HALL, SARASPUR, AHMEDABAD 380 002 / VS. THE ITO, OLD WARD-13(1), NOW WARD 7(1)(1), AHMEDABAD. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAHPY 5612 K ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.F. JAIN, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANTONY PARIATH, SR. D.R. / DATE OF HEARING 06/03/2018 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21/03/2018 $% / O R D E R PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-7, AHMEDABAD, V IDE APPEAL NO.CIT(A)-7/102/15-16 DATED 24/05/2016 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2010-11 FOR OBSERVING THE PENALTY OF RS.45,300/- FO R ALLEGED FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAS TAKEN BY THE ASS ESSEE: 1. THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN UPHOLDING THE PENALTY OF RS.45,300/- FOR ALLEGED FURNISHING O F INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME IN AS MUCH AS THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH DEFAULT. ITA NO.1733/AHD /2016 SHRI ASHOKKUMAR Y. YADAV VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2010-11 - 2 - 2. SHE OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THE PENALTY AS BAD IN LA W AND ON FACT IN AS MUCH AS THAT THE CONDITIONS GIVEN IN EXPLANATION -1 TO SECTION 271(1)(C) WERE NOT FULFILLED AND THAT THE EXPLANATI ON OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS BONA FIDE. 3. SHE OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THE PENALTY LEVIED AS BA D IN LAW AS NO SPECIFIC DEFAULT HAS BEEN RECORDED BY THE A.O. WHIL E ISSUING THE PENALTY NOTICE. 4. THE PENALTY ORDER IS ALSO BAD IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN AS MUCH NO INDEPENDENT FINDING HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE A.O. AS P ENALTY AND ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT. 5. ON THE FACTS NO SUCH PENALTY OUGHT TO HAVE BE EN LEVIED. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO FOUND THAT THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.1,00,000/- IN THE ASSE SSEES SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH BANK OF BARODA, VIRAMGAM. IN REPLY OF THE NOTICE, APPELLANT STATED THAT THIS MONEY WAS GIVEN TO HIM BY HIS FATH ER AFTER SELLING HIS PROPERTY. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THE COPY OF SALE DEED, COPY OF CONFIRMATION OF RS.1,00,000/- FOR GIFT RECEIVED AND COPY OF LETT ER OF AO TO BANK AND POST OFFICE. APPELLANT ALLEGED THAT LOWER AUTHORITI ES HAVE NOT CONSIDERED HIS SUBMISSION AND LEVIED THE PENALTY OF RS.45,300/ -. 4. IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS OUR OWN BENCH OF ITAT IN ITA NO.168/AHD/2015 FOR ASST. YEAR 2010-11, DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.1,00,000/- MADE U/S.68 OF THE ACT. SO FAR REMAIN ING QUANTUM OF RS.46,605/- COMPRISES OF ADDITION OF RS.15,025/- ON ACCOUNT OF NSC ACCRUED INTEREST, RS.26,203/- TOWARDS INTEREST CRED IT IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT AND RS.5,381/- TOWARDS INTEREST ACCRUED ON FD ON WHICH TDS DEDUCTED, THESE INCOME ARE IN THE NATURE OF ACCRUED INCOME/NOT RECEIVED OR SMALL INTEREST INCOME WHERE THE BANK ACCOUNT IS PROPERLY DISCLOSED THUS THE CASE MADE OUT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TH AT BONAFIDE ERROR HAS ITA NO.1733/AHD /2016 SHRI ASHOKKUMAR Y. YADAV VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2010-11 - 3 - ACCRUED IS PLAUSIBLE. CONSIDERING THE SMALLNESS OF AMOUNT, WE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE BENEFIT OF DOUBT TO THE APPELLANT AND DELET E THE PENALTY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 21 / 0 3 /201 8 P SD/- SD/- IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K IZNHI DQEKJ DSFM;K EGKOHJ IZLKN EGKOHJ IZLKN EGKOHJ IZLKN EGKOHJ IZLKN YKS[KK LN YKS[KK LN YKS[KK LN YKS[KK LNL; L; L; L; U;KF;D LNL; U;KF;D LNL; U;KF;D LNL; U;KF;D LNL; (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 21/03/2018 PRITI YADAV, SR.PS !'# $#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. & '( ) / CONCERNED CIT 4. ) () / THE CIT(A)-5, AHMEDABAD. 5. ,-. //'( , '(# , 12$&$ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. .34 5 / GUARD FILE. % & / BY ORDER, , / //TRUE COPY// '/& () ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION 06/03/2018 (DICTATION-PAD 2 PA GES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS APPEAL-FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 07/03/2018 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER