Shri Vashrambhai Madhabhai Mordiya, Surat V. The ACIT, Circle-8, Surat

ITA 2332/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1160 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANTONY PARIATH
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ././ ./ ITA NO. 2332/AHD/2013 / // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 VASHRAMBHAI M. MORDIYA, 5, SWAMINARAYAN NAGAR, DABHOLI CHART RASTA, VED ROAD, SURAT 395004 PAN : BVRPM 5411 J VS THE ACIT, CIRCLE-8, SURAT / // / (APPELLANT) / // / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI ANTONY PARIATH, SR DR / // / DATE OF HEARING : 08/07/2016 / // / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11/07/2016 / // / O R D E R THIS IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-V, SURAT DATED 02.08.2013, PERTAINING TO 2006-07, AGITATED AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 19 61. 2. NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. HOWEVER, ON CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON R ECORD AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE SR. DR, IT WAS CONSIDERED APPROP RIATE TO PROCEED WITH THE PRESENT APPEAL EX- PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE-APPELLANT ON MERIT. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HAS LEVIED THE PENALTY FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICES U/S. 142( 1) DATED 14.11.2011 AND 21.11.2011. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS LEVIED PENALT Y OF RS. 10,000/- FOR EACH DEFAULT AMOUNTING TO RS. 20,000/-. 4. I HAVE HEARD LD. SR. DR, PERUSED THE MATERIAL A VAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. I N THE CASE UNDER APPEAL, IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH, DELHI IN THE CASE OF SMT. REKHA RANI IN ITA NO. 6131/DEL/2013 DA TED 06.05.2015, WHICH READ AS UNDER:- SMC-ITA NO. 2332/AHD/2013 VASHRAMBHAI MADHUABHAI MORDIYA VS. ACIT AY : 2006-07 2 'THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) COULD NOT BE IMP OSED FOR EACH AND EVERY NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(2), WHICH REM AINED NOT COMPLIED WITH ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. THE PROVISION OF SECTI ON 271(1)(B) IS OF DETERRENT NATURE AND NOT FOR EARNING REVENUE. ANY OTHER VIEW T AKEN SHALL LEAD TO THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY FOR ANY NUMBER OF TIMES (WITH OUT LIMITS) FOR THE SAME DEFAULT OF NOT APPEARING IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2). THIS DOES NOT SEEM TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATUR E IN ENACTING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271(1)(B). IN CASE OF FAILURE OF THE ASSES SEE TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) THE REMEDY WITH THE ASSES SING OFFICER LIES WITH FRAMING OF 'BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT' UNDER THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 144 AND NOT TO IMPOSE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) AGA IN AND AGAIN. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE PENALTY . A.Y. 2006-07 LEVIE D UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) IS TO BE RESTRICTED TO THE FIRST DEFAULT OF THE ASS ESSEE IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(2).' 5. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND ARE IDENTICAL, TH EREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE FINDINGS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH (SU PRA), I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RESTRICT THE PENALTY SO LEVIED AT RS. 10,000/-. THUS, THE ASSESSEE GETS A RELIEF OF RS. 10,000/-. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11 TH JULY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- R.P. TOLANI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD; DATED 11/07/2016 *BIJU T. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / // / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD