Shri Jasmindersinh Grewal, Baroda V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 2536/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1244 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 26-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K PANDEY
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Peak credit; Bonafide belief; Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: S H RI PRAMOD KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI JASMINDERSINH GREWAL, 83, ADROIT HOUSE, NIZAMPURA, BARODA PAN: ACAPG0878L (APPELLANT) VS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), BARODA (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI A.K. PANDEY, SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: MS. URVASHI SHODHAN , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 26 - 08 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 - 11 - 2 015 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08, AR ISES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - I, BARODA DATED 12 - 08 - 2011 IN APPEAL NO. CAB - I/51/ 10 - 11 , IN PROCEEDINGS UND ER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T A NO . 2536 / A HD/20 11 A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 I.T.A NO. 2536/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI JASMINDERSINH GREWAL VS. DCIT 2 2. THE ASSESSEE S SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND CHALLENGES CORRECTNESS OF SECTION 271(1) (C) PENALTY OF RS. 5 LACS IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS AFFIRMED IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. HE HAD FILED RETURN ON 30 - 04 - 2007. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED HIM TO HAVE DISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH PARGATI SAHKARI BANK ONLY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK UP SCRUTINY BASED ON AIR INFORMATION THAT ASSESSEE S BANK ACCOUNT WITH ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE HAS SEEN CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 29,03,095/ - AS WELL AS YET ANOTHER SUM OF RS. 3,85,122/ - IN A CITY BANK ACCOUNT. HE SOUGHT TO ADD THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. THE ASSESSEE IN TURN FILED HIS REVISED RETURN ON 26 - 11 - 2009 SHOWING INCOME OF RS. 17,16,540/ - THEREBY OFFERING PEAK CASH DEPOSITS IN THE ABOVE STATED ACCOUNT ALONG WITH INTEREST TH EREUPON AND INITIAL CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 15,91,220/ - , RS. 7720/ - AND RS. 25,500/ - OVER AND ABOVE THAT DISCLOSED EARLIER. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURE OF RS. 1 LACS AND ACCEPTED THIS REVISED INCOME. HE ACCORDING LY FRAMED A REGULAR ASSESSMENT ON 29 - 12 - 2009. THE CASE F ILE REVEALS THAT HE INITIATED T HE IMPUGNED SECTION 271(1) (C) PENALTY PROCEEDINGS QUA THE ABOVE STATED ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 16,24,440/ - . QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS ATTAINED FINALITY AT THIS STAGE ITSEL F. 3. WE COME TO PENALTY PROCEEDINGS NOW. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TO HAVE OFFERED THE ABOVE STATED ADDITIONAL INCOME BY WAY OF REVISED RETURN IN ORDER TO BUY PEACE IN BONAFIDE BELIEF. HE ACCORDINGLY SOUGHT FOR DROPPING THE PENALTY NOTICE. THE ASSESSI NG I.T.A NO. 2536/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI JASMINDERSINH GREWAL VS. DCIT 3 OFFICER REJECTED THE SAME INTER ALIA BY HOLDING THAT THE INITIAL RETURN DID NOT CONTAIN PARTICULARS OF THE REMAINING TWO BANK ACCOUNTS WHICH WERE DISCLOSED ONLY AFTER BEING CAUGH T ON THE WRONG FOOT IN SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS. HE HELD FACTS OF THE CASE AS A CLEAR CUT INSTANCE OF CONCEALMENT FOR IMPOSING THE IMPUGNED PENALTY OF RS . 5 LACS. THE SAME HAS BEEN CONFIRMED IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE CASE FILE. THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE FACTUAL PO SITION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DISCLOSED TWO BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED WITH THE ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND CITY BANK IN THE ENCLOSURES FILED WITH THE ORIGINAL RETURN. THERE IS FURTHER NO ISSUE THAT HE HAD DEPOSITED CASH SUMS AMOUNTING TO RS. 29,03,095 / - AND RS. 3,85,122/ - RESPECTIVELY IN THESE TWO ACCOUNTS. HE COMPUTED PEAK DEPOSITS OF RS. 16,24,440/ - (SUPRA) AND DECLARED THE SAME AS INCOME WITH THE REVISED RETURN IN SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITI ES TREAT IT AS A CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME WITHI N THE MEANING OF SECTION 271(1)(C) BY HOLDING THAT THIS ADDITIONAL INCOME SAW LIGHT OF THE DAY ONLY AFTER THE NECESSARY SHOW CAUSE IN SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSEE PLEADS BONAFIDE S IN FILING REVISED RETURN. WE OBSERVE IN THESE PECULIAR F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HIS REVISED RETURN STANDS ACCEPTED DURING ASSESSMENT ITSELF. AND ALSO THERE IS NO DENIAL OF THE FACT THAT IT IS NOT ALL CASH DEPOSITS WHICH HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE UNEXPLAINED BUT ONLY A PART THEREOF DECLARED AFTER COMPUTATION OF PEAK CREDITS. WE ARE OF THE OPINION IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF COMPUTED PEAK CREDITS FOR DECLARING I.T.A NO. 2536/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2007 - 08 PAGE NO SHRI JASMINDERSINH GREWAL VS. DCIT 4 THE SAME AS ADDITIONAL INCOME. WE ACCORDINGLY HOLD THAT ASSESSEE S ACT AND CONDUCT AT THE VERY INITIAL STAGE IN NOT D ECLARING HIS TWO BANK ACCOUNTS COMPRISING OF THE ADDITIONAL INCOME DOES NOT AMOUNT TO AN ACT OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME UNDER THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISION. THEREFORE, WE DELETE THE IMPUGNED CORRESPONDING PENALTY IN QUESTION OF RS. 5 LACS UNDER CHALLEN GE IN THE INSTANT APPEAL. THE SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS ACCEPTED. 5. THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 23 - 11 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 23 /11 /2015 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,