G.S.R. NEGI, V. ACIT 26(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2415/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8818 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JYOTI LAXMI
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Non compliance

Judgement Text

I.T.A NO.2415/ MUM/2010 G.S.R.NEGI, 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, G BENCH, MUMBAI. [ CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR, AM AND V. DURGA RAO, JM ] I.T.A NO.2415/ MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2002-03 G.S.R.NEGI, .. APPELLANT 9/36, GOPALPURA, VANKHANDESHWAR MAHADEV MORENA (M.P) PA NO.ABAPN 1533 G VS ASST..COMM. OF INCOME TAX 26(1) ,. RESPONDEN T MUMBAI APPEARANCES: NONE , FOR THE APPELLANT JYOTI LAXMI, FOR THE RESPONDENT O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. BY WAY OF THESE APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CALLE D INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF CIT(A)S ORDERS DATED 3.2.2010, CONFIRMING THE PENA LTY OF `.10,000/- LEVIED U/S.271(1)(B) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-2003. 2. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING, NO ONE APP EARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED ON FOR HEARING. HOWEVER, SINCE IT IS AN APPEAL RELATING TO A RETIRED PERSON, INVOLVES A SMALL AMOU NT OF ` .10,000 AND IT CAN BE DECIDED I.T.A NO.2415/ MUM/2010 G.S.R.NEGI, 2 ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE PROCEED TO D O SO AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. THE APPLICANT BEFORE US IS A RETIRED EMPLOYEE OF THE BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATIO N LTD. HE WAS POSTED AT GWALIOR SINCE 1994 AND ASSESSED TO TAX REGULARLY BY THE ITO SALARY WARD, GWALIOR. THE ASSESSEE WAS SERVED A NOTICE U/S.148 BY ACIT, CIRC LE 26(1), MUMBAI AND IT WAS IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS SO REOPENED THAT T HE ASSESSEE WAS IMPOSED PENALTY OF ` .10,000 FOR NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE THE AO. THE C IT (A) REJECTED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS FAILED TO BRING ANY EVIDENCE OR FACT ON RECORD WHICH SHOWS THE REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON ATTENDANCE BEFORE THE AO. NOT SATISFIED BY THE STAND SO TAKEN BY THE CI T (A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AS ALSO THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 5. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A RESIDENT OF MOREN A, MADHYA PRADESH AND IS A RETIRED PERSON. AS IT APPEARS FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REGULARLY ASSESSED TO TAX IN GWALIOR AND IT IS ONLY AS A RESULT OF REOPENING OF CASES OF LARGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES OF BPCL THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED UPON TO FILE A RETURN IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S.147 BY THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2 6(1), MUMBAI. NON COMPLIANCE OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AND PAR TICULARLY BEARING IN MIND THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS LIVING IN FAR AWAY PLACE AND IS A RETIRED SALARIED EMPLOYEE, SEEMS TO BE ON ACCOUNT OF REASONABLE CAUSE. WE CAN NOT EQUATE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THAT OF REGULAR BUSINESS OR CORPORATE ASSESSEE OR A PERSON BASED IN MUMBAI. AS A MATTER OF FACT THE JURISDICTION OF TH E AO HAS NOT BEEN CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT HE IS REGULARLY ASSESSE D TO TAX IN GWALIOR. ALL THESE FACTS TAKEN TOGETHER POINTS OUT REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON- APPEARANCE BEFORE THE AO. RIGHT NOW, WE ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH THE QUESTION WHETHE R OR NOT IT WAS A FIT CASE FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APPEARANCE. SO FAR AS THIS ASPECT IS I.T.A NO.2415/ MUM/2010 G.S.R.NEGI, 3 CONCERNED, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IT WAS NOT A FIT CASE FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY. BEARING IN MIND THE ABOVE DISCUSSION AS ALSO THE EN TIRETY OF THE CASE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTY OF ` .10,000. THE ASSESSEE GETS RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS STAND ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH JANUARY, 2011 SD/- (V. DURGA RAO ) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 19TH JANUARY, 2011 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),28, MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CITY-26 , MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH G, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI I.T.A NO.2415/ MUM/2010 G.S.R.NEGI, 4 I.T.A NO.2415/ MUM/2010 G.S.R.NEGI, 5