M/s. Patel Enterprise, Surat V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-3, Surat

ITA 2468/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 50783 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 12-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR K SYAM PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: NONEWRITTEN SUBMISSION

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD , . ! !,'# ' $ BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2468/AHD/2009 ( ! & ! & ! & ! & / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) PATEL ENTERPRISES G-3, RENUKA BHAVAN OPP.SWAMINARAYAN SOC. PUNA BOMBAY MARKET ROAD, SURAT ! ! ! ! / VS. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 SURAT ' '# ./() ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAJFP 0205 D ( '* / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( +,'* / RESPONDENT ) '* - ' / APPELLANT BY : -NONE-(WRITTEN SUBMISSION) +,'* . - ' / RESPONDENT BY : DR.K.SYAM PRASAD, SR.D.R. !/ . 0# / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 12.10.2011 1 & . 0# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.10.2011 '2 / O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE W HICH HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-II, AHMEDABAD DATED 20/07/2009 PASSED FOR A.Y. 2006-07 AND THE ONLY G ROUND IS IN RESPECT OF CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271A OF THE I.T. ACT OF RS.25,000/ -. ITA NO.2468/AHD /2009 PATEL ENTERPRISE VS. DCIT ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 2 - 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NO ONE HAS APPEARED FRO M THE SIDE OF THE APPELLANT, THOUGH NOTICES WERE ISSUED IN THE PAST. EVEN FOR THIS DATE OF HEARING A NOTICE WAS DULY SERVED, AS PER THE ACKNOW LEDGEMENT DUE ON RECORD, HENCE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS APPEAL. IN VIEW OF THIS, BEING THE ISSUE IS TRIFLE IN NATURE, THEREFORE SHOULD NOT BE KEPT PENDING, HENCE, HEREINBELOW WE PROCEED EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING THE LD.DR. 3. VIDE AN ORDER PASSED U/S.271A OF THE I.T.ACT DAT ED 30/04/2008, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT A SEARCH ACTION WAS CARRIED OUT ON 07/03/2006 ON THE GROUP OF THE ASSESSEE VIZ. HIR PARA GROUP. A SUM OF RS.1.30 CRORES WAS DISCLOSED IN THE HANDS OF TH E ASSESSEE. IT HAS ALSO BEEN NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESS EE HAD UNDERTAKEN FIVE PROJECTS AS LISTED THEREIN. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE W AS CARRYING OUT FIVE PROJECTS BUT IT WAS FOUND THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE NOT MAINTAINED. RATHER IN A SUBMISSION DATED 18/10/2007, AS NOTED B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT NO BO OKS OF ACCOUNT WERE MAINTAINED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS, THEREFORE, CONCLUDED THAT HE WAS SATISFIED THAT IT WAS A FIT CASE FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S.271A OF THE I.T.ACT AND RESULTANTLY A PENALTY OF RS.25,000/- WA S LEVIED. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. FROM THE SIDE OF THE REVENUE, LD.DR, DR.K.SYAM P RASAD APPEARED AND SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, WE HAVE GATHERED THAT THE ONLY PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN RESPECT OF DEFAULT OF NON-MAIN TENANCE OF ACCOUNT ITA NO.2468/AHD /2009 PATEL ENTERPRISE VS. DCIT ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 3 - WAS THAT SOME PERSONAL ACCOUNTS WERE MAINTAINED BUT PROPER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF EACH PROJECT WAS NOT MAINTAIN ED. IT HAS ALSO BEEN PLEADED THAT THE INCOME OF THE PROJECT WAS NOT DISC LOSED, THEREFORE, IN RESPECT OF AN UNDISCLOSED INCOME THERE COULD BE NO PRESUMPTION TO MAINTAIN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. FOR THIS LEGAL PROP OSITION, RELIANCE WAS PLACED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) ON THE DECISION OF ITAT DELHI BENCH D IN THE CASE OF CHANDHA SUDHIRKUMAR VS. ITO [1996]56 ITD 470(DELH- TRIB.). HOWEVER, WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE SAID DECISION WAS IN RESPECT OF AUDIT OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND THE DEFAULT WAS UNDER SECTION 44AB OF THE I.T.ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD LEVIED THE PENA LTY FOR THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO GET THE ACCOUNTS AUDITED. AS AGAINST TH AT, IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, THE QUESTION AS RAKED UP BY THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT WAS ALTOGETHER NON- MAINTENANCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. SPECIALLY WHEN T HE ASSESSEE WAS IN THE BUSINESS OF CONSTRUCTION OF FEW PROJECTS AND UN ACCOUNTED INCOME OF MORE THAN RS.1 CRORE WAS DISCLOSED, THEN IT WAS RAT HER MANDATORY ON HIS PART TO MAINTAIN THE PROPER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN O UR CONSIDERED OPINION, DUE TO NON-MAINTENANCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PENALTY WAS RIGHTLY LEVIED. WE HEREBY CONFIRM THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW AND DISMISS THIS GROUND. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 21/ 10 /2011 30..!, .!../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NO.2468/AHD /2009 PATEL ENTERPRISE VS. DCIT ASST.YEAR 2006-07 - 4 - '2 . +4 5'4& '2 . +4 5'4& '2 . +4 5'4& '2 . +4 5'4&/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '* / THE APPELLANT 2. +,'* / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6() / THE CIT(A)-II, AHMEDABAD 5. 49: +! , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :;