Usha Bala Chits Pvt.Ltd., Eluru V. THE ACIT, Eluru

ITA 233/VIZ/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8594 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D KOMALI KRISHNA

Judgement Text

1 I.T.A. NOS.232 & 233 /VIZ/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISHAKHAPATNA M BEFORE S/SHRI D.MANMOHAN (VP) & J.SUDHAKAR REDDY (A M) I.T.A. NOS.232 & 233 /VIZ/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09 DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, DABA GARDENS, VISAKHAPATNAM VS. SMT. BAISETTY REVATHI, 49 - 54 - 16/3, 4 TH FLOOR, MADHURI RESIDENCY APARTMENTS, B.S.LAYOUT, VISAKHAPATNAM PAN/GIR NO. : ADAPB 0569 J ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SMT. D. KOMALI KRISHNA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI I. KAMA SASTRY DATE OF HEARING : 04/12/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/12/2014 O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM BOTH THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGA INST A COMMON ORDER DATED 8.2.2013 OF LD CIT(A)-V VISAKHAPATNAM, FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2008-09, RESPECTIVELY CHALLENGING THE CANCELLATION OF PENALT Y UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE INVOKED RULE 27 OF ITAT RULES AND A RGUED THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 274 R.W.S 271 IS BAD IN LAW AND HENCE, THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ARE VOID ABI-NITIO. 3. WE HAVE HEARD SMT. D. KOMALI KRISHNA, LD DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND SHRI I. KAMA SASTRY, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IN THE I MPUGNED ORDER, AT PARA 6.1, THE LD CIT(A) HELD AS FOLLOWS: 2 I.T.A. NOS.232 & 233 /VIZ/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09 IN ADDITION, THE AR ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WAS ILLEGAL AS THE NOTICE ISSUED ALONG WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER I .E NOTICE DTD.26.07.2010 REFERRED TO DEFAULT TO COMPLY WITH NOTICE ISSUED U/ S.143(2) AND NOT FOR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS. THE LD CIT(A) REJECTED THIS CONTENTION OF THE ASSE SSEE. 4. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT P ENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE ILLEGAL AS THE NOTICE DATED 26.7.2010 ISSUED ALONGWITH THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER REFERRED TO THE DEFAULT TO COMPLY WITH NOTICE ISSUED U/S.143(2) AND NOT FOR C ONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS NOT GRANTED RELIEF TO THE AS SESSEE ON THIS COUNT, AND HENCE, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO RELY RULE 27 OF ITAT RULES. 5. THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 26.7.2010 ARE AT PAGES 1 & 2 OF ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2008-09. A PERUSA L OF THE SAME DISCLOSES THAT THE AO HAS STRUCK OUT THE COLUMNS RELATING TO HAVE CONCEA LED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF SUCH INCOME AN D HAS ISSUED NOTICE ONLY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1)/143(2) OF T HE ACT DATED 27.2.2009, 4.6.2009 & 25.8.2009. THERE IS NO NOTICE ISSUED FRAMING THE C HARGE, EITHER FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO QUASH THE PENALTY ORD ER ON THIS COUNT. IN VIEW OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE REJECT THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVE NUE 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 /12 /2014 . SD/- SD/- (D.MANMOHAN ) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VISHAKHAPATNAM DATED 04 / 12/2014 3 I.T.A. NOS.232 & 233 /VIZ/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09 PARIDA , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE : 2. THE RESPONDENT. : 3. THE CIT(A) - VISAKHAPATNAM 4. CIT , VISAKHAPATNAM 5. DR, ITAT, VISHAKHAPATNAM 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR.PS, ITAT, VISHAKHAPATNAM //TRUE COPY//