Anil Kumar Lalbhai Patel, Ahmedabad V. Income Tax Officer,Ward-3, Mehsana

ITA 2114/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 211420514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL KSHATRIYA

Judgement Text

ITA NO S . 211 4 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2 0 0 6 - 07 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH , SMC , AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM ] ITA NO. 2 11 4 / AHD / 2 0 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 6 - 07 ANIL KUMAR LALBHAI PATEL, ....... .. . ..... APPELLANT 2, MEHSANA SOCIETY, NAVA WADAJ, AHMEDABAD. [PAN A CJPP 1188 M ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, .... .................. .... .. RESPONDENT WARD 3, MEHSANA . APPEARANCES BY: ANIL KSH A TRIYA FOR THE APPELLANT ANIL K U MAR FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : SEPTEMBER 15 TH , 201 5 DATE O F PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : NOVEMBER 16 TH , 2015 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE LD . CIT (A) S ORDER DATED 16 TH APRIL, 2015 UPHOLDING PENALTY OF RS. 1 5, 911 / - UNDER SECTION 271 (1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( THE ACT FOR SHORT), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 6 - 07 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GRIEVANCES: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEAL S ) IS BAD IN LAW AND UNFAIR. THE SA ME MAY BE QUASHED. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT (APPEAL S ) HAS G R OSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS. 1 5 ,911 / - U/S. 271 (1)(C) , WHEN HE OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE SAME. ITA NO S . 211 4 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2 0 0 6 - 07 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. TO ADJUDIC ATE ON THIS APPEAL , ONLY A FEW MATERIAL FACTS NEED TO BE TAKEN NOT OF. IT IS A CASE OF REOPENED ASSESSMENT O N THE B ASIS OF AI R INFORMATION ABOUT INVESTMENT IN SHARES. IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THESE INVESTMENTS WERE FOUND TO HAVE BEEN M A DE THROUGH CHEQUES BUT THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS FOUND TO HAVE SOME C A SH DEPOSITS AGGREGATING TO RS.1,00,000/ - . IT WAS ALSO FOUND THAT THE INTEREST CREDITED TO SB ACCOUNT , AMOUNTING TO RS.2,243/ - , WAS A LSO NOT BROUGHT TO TAX . I T WAS IN THI S BACKDROP THAT PENALTY UNDER S ECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT W A S ALSO IMPOSED IN RESPECT OF THESE ADDITIONS . AGGRIEVED , ASSESS EE CARRIED THE MA T TER IN APP EAL BUT WITHOUT A NY SUCCESS. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED A ND IS IN FUR T HER APPEAL BEFORE ME. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTI ONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 5. I FIND THAT MERELY BECAUSE THERE A RE CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK A CCOUNT TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,00,000 / - CANNOT BE FO U ND TO BE BASIS FOR IMPOSI NG PENALTY BY HOLDING IT TO BE CONCEALED INCOME. IT M A Y BE GOOD BASIS FOR ADDITION B UT SO FAR AS PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) IS CONCERNED IT IS CERTAINLY INAPPROPRIATE PARTICULARLY WHEN TO TAL DEMAND RAISED ON THE ASSESSEE , INCLUDING INTEREST UNDER SEC TION 234A, IS RS.230 / - . I, THEREFORE , DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTY. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 16 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2015. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 16 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2015 PBN/* ITA NO S . 211 4 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2 0 0 6 - 07 PAGE 3 OF 3 COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD