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

ITA 2115/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 211520514 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
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

ITA NO S . 211 5 /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 5 / 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 1 6 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 0 , 000 / - UNDER SECTION 271 (1)( B ) 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 SAME MAY BE QUASHED. ITA NO S . 211 5 /AHD/ 20 1 5 ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2 0 0 6 - 07 PAGE 2 OF 3 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. 10,000/ - U/S. 271 (1)(B) , WHEN HE OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE SAME. 3. TO AD JUDICATE ON THIS APPEAL , IT I S SUFFICIENT TO TAKE NOTE OF THE FACT THAT THE IMPUGNED PENALTY IS IMPOSED ON THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF HIS NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE DATED 7 TH OCTOBER , 2013 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 142(1) OF THE ACT. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT HE WAS ABROAD DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD AND THE ASSESSEE DULY FURNISHED A COPY OF HIS PASSPORT IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION. LEARNED CIT ( A ) , HOWEVER, BRUSHED ASIDE THIS PLEA ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED PETITION UNDER RULE 46A FOR REMAND REPORT. THE ASSESSEE IS NO T SATISFIED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE ME. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 5. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXPLANATION FOR HIS LAPSE AND NO INFIRMITIES ARE POINTED OUT IN THE EXPLANATION. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, T HE IMPUGNED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT INDEED DESERVES TO BE DELETED. I DIRECT SO. 6 . I N 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 N OVEMBER , 2015 PBN/* ITA NO S . 211 5 /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, A HMEDABAD