ACIT, Bhubaneswar V. Smitanjali Mania, Bhubaneswar

ITA 216/CTK/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 21622114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A BHATTACHARJEE
• Assessee Lawyers: SASWAT ACHARYA
• Keywords: Salary income; Bonafide belief; Revised return
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK ( ) BEFORE . . , , HONBLE SHRI K.K.GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. /AND . . . , S HRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER / I.T.A.NO S . 216 AND 217/CTK/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005 - 06 AND 2006 - 07 ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), BHUBANESWAR. - - - VERSUS - MRS. SMITANJALI MANIA, PLOT NO.A - 65, 1, NAYAPALLI, BHUBANESWAR PAN: ADFPM 1776 M ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / FOR THE APPELLANT : / SHRI A.BHATTACHARJEE, DR / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / SHRI SASWAT ACHARYA, AR / DA TE OF HEARING: 19.07.2012 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24.08.2012 / ORDER . . , , SHRI K.K.GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THESE APPEALS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 AND 2006 - 07 ARE PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGITATING THE DELET ION OF PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT,1961 FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD LEVIED PENALTY OF 8,40,040 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 AND 4,15,925 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS AS HAVE BE EN BROUGHT ON RECORD ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY, HOUSE PROPERTY, PRAWN CULTURE BUSINESS, INTEREST AND AGRICULTURE. THE ASSESSEE HAD INITIALLY DISCLOSED TOTAL INCOME OF 1,81,340 IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 AND 1, 77 ,070 IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 INCLUDING AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM CULTIVATION WITHOUT INCLUDING INCOME FROM PRAWN CULTURE AS THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER THE BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THE SAME IS NOT LIABLE TO TAX. HOWEVER ON BECOMING I.T.A.NOS. 216 AND 217/CTK/2012 2 AWARE OF ITS TAXABILITY S HE VOLUNTARILY DISCLOSED AN A DDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.8,35,618 IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 AND 12,50,000 IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 FROM PRAWN CULTURE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER . THE ASSESSING OFFICER IMPOSED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) ON THE DISCLOSED ADDITIONAL INCOME HOLDING A VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE INITIALLY TRIED TO CONCEAL THE INCO ME BUT WHEN GOT CAUGHT ON RECEIPT OF AUTHENTIC INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE NARRATED THE STORY OF PRAWN CULTURE AND ENHANCED THE RETURN INCOME IN THE RETURN FILED SUBSEQUENTLY. 4. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE APPEALED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY CONSID ERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE CASE LAWS RELIED ON BEFORE HIM, THE LEARNED CIT(A) CANCELLED THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.271(1)(C) FOR BOTH THE AYS UNDER CONSI DERATION. AGGRIEVED THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, WE ARE INCLINED TO HOLD THAT THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS (P) LTD (322 ITR 158) APPIES TO THE PRESENT FACTS OF THE CASE INSOFAR AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DENIED THE ASSESSEE THE CLAIM OF AGRICU LTURAL INCOME WHEN HE HIMSELF FOUND THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK PERTAINING TO THE PRAWN CULTURE WHICH THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 HAD RENDERED PART OF HIS AGRICULTURAL INCOME APART FROM PRAWN CULTURE. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS BROUGHT TO TAX UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 WHEN THE REVISED RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR REASSESSMENT INCLUDING THE SAID INCOME. HAVING VERIFIED THESE FACTS, THE LEARNED CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO CONSIDER THE CASE BY TAKING I.T.A.NOS. 216 AND 217/CTK/2012 3 COGNIZANC E OF VARIOUS DECISIONS BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES INCLUDING HONBLE HIGH COURTS AND APPEX COURT. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RELIED ON A DECISION OF THIS BENCH ITAT IN THE CASE OF SRI SUKANTA DASDH V. INCOME - TAX OFFICER IN ITA NO.313/C TK/2011 DT.13.1.2012 FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT LAW IS WELL SETTLED THAT FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C), THE FINDING GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR DETERMINING OR COMPUTING THE TAX IS NOT CONCLUSIVE. BEFORE SUCH PENALTY IS IMPOSED, THE ENTIRETY O F CIRCUMSTANCES MUST REASONABLY POINT TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONSCIOUSLY CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME OR HAS DELIBERATELY FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS. IN THE PRESENT CASE IN HAND, BOTH THE CONDITION PRECEDENT IS LACKING AS RIGHTLY OBSERVED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN DETAIL IN HIS ORDER, WHICH WE UPHOLD THE PART OF THAT ORDER. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). WE UP HOLD THE SAME AND DISMISS THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. S D/ - S D/ - ( . . . ) , (K.S.S.PRASAD RAO), JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . . ) , , (K.K.GUPTA), A CCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( ) DATE: 24.08.2012 - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . / THE APPELLANT : ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), BHUBANESWAR 2 / THE RESPONDENT: MRS. SMITANJALI MANIA, PLOT NO.A - 65,1, NAYAPALLI, BHUBANESWAR 3 . / THE CIT, 4 . ( )/ THE CIT(A), 5 . / DR, CUTTACK BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . ( ), (H.K.PADHEE), SENIOR.PRIVATE SECRETARY. I.T.A.NOS. 216 AND 217/CTK/2012 4 / TRUE COPY, / BY ORDER, APPENDIX XVII SEAL TO BE AFFIXED ON THE ORDER SHEET BY THE SR . P.S./P.S. AFTER DICTATION IS GIVEN 1. DATE OF DICTATION 13.08.2012 . 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 14.08.2012 OTHER MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR . P.S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.... 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S 24.08.2012 . 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 27.08.2012 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER ................ 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF TH E ORDER ..