Shri. Kareemsab K. Bagwan, Belgaum V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Belgaum

ITA 207/PAN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1013 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K M MAHESH LD
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 207 /PNJ/2014 (ASST. YEAR : 200 8 - 0 9 ) SHRI KAREEMSAB K. BAGWAN , VEGETABLE MERCHANT, SHOP NO. 20, VEGETABLE MARKET, FORT ROAD, BELGAUM . VS. ITO , WARD - 2(2), BELGAUM . PAN NO. ACMPB 2574 N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE . DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI K.M. MAHESH LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 01 / 0 6 /2015 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 2 / 0 6 /201 5 . O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), BELGAUM IN APPEAL NO. 567/BGM/ 2010 - 11 DATED 0 1 /0 4 /201 4 FOR THE A.Y. 200 8 - 0 9 . 2. NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . WRITTEN SUBMISSION WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K.M. MAHESH , LD. DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 2 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED DR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A VEGETABLE TRADER. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT COOPERATED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND HAD NOT PROVIDED ANY DETAILS . CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD LEVIED PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) H AS ALSO CONFIRMED THE PENALTY LEVIED . LD. DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 . I HAVE CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED AND THE ORDERS OF THE L D. CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144 OF THE ACT. ONCE ASSESSMENT IS DONE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 143(3) OF THE ACT, THE EARLIER DEFECTS STAND CONCLUDED AND PARDONED. FURTHER, ADMITTEDLY , THE ASSESSEE HAS RESPONDED TO MOST OF THE NOTICES. INSOFAR AS , HE ALSO GIVEN REASONS WHY HE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS . IT IS NOTICED THAT LETTER DATED 27/04/2010 SEEMS TO BE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ONLY ON 14/09/2010 AFTER A LONG GAP OF 05 MONTHS . ALSO, REMINDER DATED 22/11/2010 WAS ISSUED TOG E THER WITH THE LETTERS DATED 02/12/2010 & 03/12/2010. IN RESPONSE TO THE LETTER SERVED ON 14/09/2010 , THE 3 ASSESSEE HAS ALSO REP LIED ON 16/09 / 2009 . CONSIDERING THESE CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON - LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENTLY , THE PENALTY LEVIED STANDS DELETED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IS ALLOWED. ( ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 2 N D JUNE , 201 5 ). S D / - ( GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 0 2 N D JUNE , 201 5 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE APPELLANT 2 . THE RESPONDENT 3 . THE LD. CIT 4 . THE CIT(A) 5 . THE D.R 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PANAJI 4 DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PA D & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED AT THE END OF FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 01 . 06 .2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 01.06.2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER N/A JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER N/A JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 01.06.2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 02.06.2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 02.06.2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER