M/s Govimd Cold Storage, Chandauli V. ITO, Varanasi

ITA 203/ALLD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 63373 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P SRIVASTA VA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.203/A/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 M/S GOVIND COLD STORAGE, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, C/O. SHRI A.K. PANDEY, ADVOCATE, RANGE-3(3),VARAN ASI. B2/A-1, SAIKUNJ APARTMENT, DAULATPUR, PANDEYPUR, VARANASI. (PAN : AABCG 6751 A). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI Y.P. SRIVASTAVA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 09.11.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.11.2012 ORDER PER A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2012 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), VARANASI FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL IS IN RESPECT OF LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER). ITA NO.203/A/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 2 3. NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOW EVER, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE T HIS CASE ON MERIT. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS NOTICED BY THE A.O. THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MENTI ONED WRONG PAN IN THE RETURN FOR A.Y. 2007-08. THE A.O. LEVIED PENALTY OF RS.10 ,000/- UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DELIBER ATELY MENTIONED WRONG PAN IN THE RETURN FILED BY IT. THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE A.O. HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHE D INACCURATE PARTICULARS. SECTION 272B PROVIDES THAT IF A PERSON FAILS TO COM PLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 139A, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY DIRECT THAT SUCH PERSON SHALL PAY, BY WAY OF PENALTY, A SUM OF RS.10,000/-. IT IS FURTHER PR OVIDED THAT IF A PERSON WHO IS REQUIRED TO QUOTE HIS PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER IN A NY DOCUMENT REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (C) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 139A, OR T O INTIMATE SUCH NUMBER AS REQUIRED BY SUB-SECTION (5A) OF THAT SECTION, QUOTE S OR INTIMATES A NUMBER WHICH IS FALSE, AND WHICH HE EITHER KNOWS OR BELIEVES TO BE FALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEVE TO BE TRUE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY DIRECT THAT SUCH PE RSON SHALL PAY, BY WAY OF PENALTY, A SUM OF RS.10,000/-. THE CONTENTION OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS THAT WHATEVER DETAILS RECEIVED FROM THE INCOME TAX WEBSITE HAS BE EN PLACED ON RECORD. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DEFAULT ON THE P ART OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THAT THEY HAVE ISSUED WRONG PAN CARD. THE A.O. DID NOT ACCEPT THE ASSESSEES ITA NO.203/A/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 3 CONTENTION ON THE GROUND THAT THE PAN CARD ISSUED B Y THE DEPARTMENT HAS CLEARLY MENTIONED THE STATUS EITHER FIRM OR COMPANY, BUT TH E ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED THE ORIGINAL PAN CARD OR PHOTOCOPY OF PAN CARD. IT WAS ALSO SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AFTER ALLOTMENT OF PAN CARD, THE ASSE SSEE FURNISHED RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 TO 2005-06 AND THE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED ACCORDINGLY. IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, THE A .O. HAS OBJECTED THAT THE PAN ALLOTTED TO THE ASSESSEE WAS FOR COMPANY AND NOT FO R THE FIRM UNDER THE STATUS THE ASSESSEE IS ASSESSED/ASSESSABLE UNDER THE INCOME TA X DEPARTMENT IGNORING THE FACTS THAT THIS BASIC IDENTIFICATION FOR THE INTERNAL USE OF THE DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSEE QUOTED THE PAN WHICH WAS ALLOTTED BY THE DEPARTMENT . AFTER CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE NOTICE THAT I T IS NOT CLEAR FROM THE PENALTY ORDER THAT WHAT WAS THE EXACT DEFAULT OF THE ASSESSEE. W HETHER THE PAN QUOTED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS FALSE AND WHICH THE ASSESSEE EITHER KN OWS OR BELIEVES TO BE FALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEVE TO BE TRUE. THE ASSESSEE HAS QUOT ED PAN WHICH WAS GIVEN BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE A.O. DID NOT POINT HOW THE WRONG P AN QUOTED IN RETURN DAMAGE TO REVENUE. IF THE DEPARTMENT HAS ISSUED A WRONG P AN FOR THAT REASON THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE PENALIZED UNLESS IT IS FOUND THAT THE PAN QUOTED OR INTIMATED IS FALSE OR WHICH THE ASSESSEE EITHER KNOWS OR BELIEVES TO BE F ALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEVE TO BE RUE. THE WORD REASONABLE HAS IN LAW THE PRIMA FA CIE MEANING OF REASONABLE WITH REGARD TO THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHICH THE ACTOR, C ALLED ON TO ACT REASONABLY, KNOWS OR OUGHT TO KNOW. REASONABLE CAUSE CAN BE RE ASONABLY SAID TO BE A CAUSE ITA NO.203/A/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 4 WHICH PREVENTS A MAN OF ORDINARY PRUDENCE AND AVERA GE INTELLIGENCE, ACTING UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCE, WITHOUT NEGLIGENCE OR INACTION OR WANT OF BONAFIDES. IN THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS REASONAB LY EXPLAINED HAT WHATEVER THE PAN CAD ALLOTTED BY THE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN QUOTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE BONAFIDE OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE DOUBTED AND UNDER THAT CIRCUMSTANCES THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE AND IN CASE OF REASONABLE CAU SE PERTLY UNDER SECANT 272B IS NOT LEVIABLE. WE ACCORDINGLY CANCEL THE PENALTY OR RS.10,000/- LEVIED UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE ACT. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT) SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (A.L. GEHLOT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 4. CIT CONCERNED 5. D.R., ITAT, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD TRUE COPY