Smt. Divya Agarwal, Kanpur V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Kanpur

ITA 268/LKW/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5750 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: P K KAPOOR
• Keywords: Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 132; 271(1)(b); 143(3); 142(1); 153A

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.268/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.268/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 SMT. DIVYA AGARWAL, 14/75, CIVIL LINES, KANPUR. PAN:ACUPG 5212 E VS. DY.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-IV, KANPUR DATED 31/01/2018 PERTAINING TO AS SESSMENT YEAR 2014- 15. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOUR GRO UNDS HOWEVER, THE CRUX OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS THE ACTION OF LEARNED C IT(A) BY WHICH HE HAS SUSTAINED THE PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- WHICH THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAD MADE U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. 2. IN THIS CASE PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 WERE INITIATED ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT. LATER ON, NOTICES U/S 142(1) WAS ISSUED FIXING COMPLIANCE ON 02/06/2016. ON THE DATE FIXED, NEITHER ANYBODY ATT ENDED NOR FILED ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ISSUED NOTICE PENALTY NOTICE U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. WHEN NO COMPLIANC E WAS MADE, THE APPELLANT BY SHRI P. K. KAPOOR, C. A. RESPONDENT BY S HRI C. K. SINGH, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 30/01/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31 / 01 /201 9 I.T.A. NO.268/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 2 ASSESSING OFFICER IMPOSED PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- U/ S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO ALSO SUSTAINED THE PENALT Y. 3. LEARNED A. R. SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT LEARNED C IT(A) WHILE CONFIRMING THE PENALTY HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THA T THE SEARCH U/S 132 HAVING BEEN CONDUCTED ON 27/11/2015, THE PROCEEDING S FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION STOOD ABATED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 153A OF THE ACT AND AS SUCH THERE WAS NO NON COMPLIANCE AT ALL AT THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. LEARNED A. R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SIN CE THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A WAS COMPLETED U/S 153A READ WITH SECTION 143(3 ) OF THE ACT THEREFORE, NO PENAL PROVISIONS U/S 271(1)(B) SHOULD HAVE BEEN INVOKED BY IMPOSING PENALTY OF RS.10,000/-/. 4. LEARNED D. R., ON THE OTHER HAND, HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND STATED THAT THE PENALTY WAS I MPOSED FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE U/S 142(1). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 142(1) TH EREFORE, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE IMPOSED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT . HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT FINALLY THE ASSESSEE DID APPEAR DURING THE ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 147/143(3) OF THE ACT. UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES I.T.A.T. LUCKNOW BENCH OF THE TRIBUNA L IN THE CASE OF SMT. REETA PATEL VS INCOME TAX OFFICER IN I.T.A. NO.598/ LKW/2016 HAS DELETED THE PENALTY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE T HROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT ASSESSE E DURING THE I.T.A. NO.268/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 3 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE NOTI CES ISSUED U/S 142(1) ON VARIOUS DATES WHICH LEARNED CIT(A) AN D ASSESSING OFFICER HAVE NOTED IN THEIR ORDER AND THE REFORE, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE IMPOSED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B ) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT FINALLY THE ASSESSEE DI D APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ASSESSMENT WA S COMPLETED U/S 143(3) AND THEREAFTER, THE MATTER TRA VELLED UPTO TRIBUNAL, WHICH VIDE ORDER DATED 30/01/2017 ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. TH EREFORE, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) . WE REVERSE THE SAME AND ALLOW THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE ABOVE APPEAL, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A). WE REVER SE THE SAME AND ALLOW THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/01/2019) SD/. SD/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:31/01/2019 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSISTANT REGISTRAR