Smt. Hetalben Hasmukhbhai Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 2597/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5742 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKIT TALSANIA
• Section: 142(1); 153A

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , .., SN ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1-7 2585 TO 2591 /AHD/2016 2007-08 TO 2013-14 SMT. HETALBEN H. PATEL, 250, NAVDHARI VAS, MUKHI VAS, PIPAN TAL-SANAND, AHMEDABAD-382110 PAN : BMNPP 3649 C ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), AHMEDABAD 8-14 2592 TO 2598 /AHD/2016 2007-08 TO 2013-14 SMT. HETALBEN H. PATEL, AHMEDABAD-382110 PAN : BMNPP 3649 C ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), AHMEDABAD ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANKIT TALSANIA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI MUDIT NAGPAL, SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 13/07/2017 # % / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25/07/2017 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THE PRESENT FOURTEEN APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AT THE IN STANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TWO ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-13, AHMEDABAD DATED 25.07.2016 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2013-14. THE SOLIT ARY ISSUE INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO B E VISITED WITH PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HERE INAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC TION 142(1) OF THE ACT DATED 14.10.2014 AND 08.01.2015. 2. IT EMERGES OUT FROM THE RECORD THAT A SEARCH UND ER SECTION 132(4) OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE GROUP CASES OF INDIA GRE EN REALITY PVT. LTD. ON 15.03.2013. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED UNDER TH E SEARCH OPERATION AND A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153C R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT WA S ISSUED UPON THE ASSESSEE. ITA NOS. 2585 TO 2598/AHD/2016 SMT. HITALBEN H. PATEL VS. ACIT AYS: 2007-08 TO 2013-14 - 2 THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT A NOTICE UN DER SECTION 142(1) ALONGWITH QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ISSUED ON 14.10.2014 WHICH WAS NO T REPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE. SIMILARLY, HE ISSUED NOTICE ON 08.01.2015 WHICH WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. THEREFORE, SEPARATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIA TED FOR VIOLATION OF EACH NOTICE. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED SEVERAL P ENALTY ORDERS DATED 17.04.2015 FOR VIOLATION OF NOTICE DATED 14.10.2014 AND ALSO PASSED VARIOUS PENALTY ORDERS DATED 28.08.2015 FOR VIOLATION OF NO TICE DATED 08.01.2015. A PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- IN EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR VIOLATION OF EACH NOTICE WAS IMPOSED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHER WORDS, IN EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR A PENALTY OF RS.20,000/- HAS BEEN IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER. 3. LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DISPOSED O F THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN TWO GROUPS, I.E., IN ONE GROUP HE DEALT WITH THE VIOLATION OF NOTICE DATED 14.10.2014 AND IN THE NEXT GROUP HE DEALT WIT H THE VIOLATION OF NOTICE DATED 08.01.2015. 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. WE FIND THAT OUT OF TOTAL SEVEN YEARS NO ADDITION WAS MADE IN FIVE YEARS; MEANING THEREBY THE PRESENCE OF ASSESSE E WAS NOT REQUIRED IN THESE FIVE YEARS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOTHING INCRIMINATING WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS BEING THE FACT, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE REMAINED PRESENT AND SHE CANNOT BE VISITED WITH PENALTY. APART FROM THI S, WE FIND THAT THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT HER FATH ER-IN-LAW, SHRI SHANKARBHAI PATEL WAS HANDLING THE ENTIRE GROUP AND HE WAS NOT KEEPING GOOD HEALTH. HE PASSED AWAY ON 03.11.2014. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PO SSESSING ANY DETAILS AND IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR HER TO LOCATE THE DETAILS IN S UCH A SHORT TIME. CONSIDERING THESE TWO ASPECTS, VIZ., NO ADDITION WAS MADE IN FI VE ASSESSMENT YEARS, I.E., 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14, ILLNE SS AND ULTIMATE DEATH OF HER FATHER-IN-LAW WHO WAS CONDUCTING THE PROCEEDINGS AT THAT TIME, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASO NS FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH ITA NOS. 2585 TO 2598/AHD/2016 SMT. HITALBEN H. PATEL VS. ACIT AYS: 2007-08 TO 2013-14 - 3 THE NOTICES AND SHE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE VISITED WITH PENALTY. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DEL ETE THE PENALTY. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25 TH JULY, 2017 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YA DAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED, 25/07/2017 **BT / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ' / THE APPELLANT 2. #' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. % ' / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ) ( / THE CIT(A)- 5. % , % , /DR,ITAT, AHMEDABAD, 6. 1 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) % ITAT, AHMEDABAD