Hiraben Shankarbhai Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 2783/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5652 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKIT TALSANIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• 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 2777 TO 2783 /AHD/2016 2007-08 TO 2013-14 HIRABEN SHANKARBHAI PATEL 250, NAVDHARI VAS, PIPAN, TAL-SANAND, AHMEDABAD-382110 PAN : CIZPP 7362 J ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), AHMEDABAD ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANKIT TALSANIA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI MUDIT NAGPAL, SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 14/07/2017 # % / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28/07/2017 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THE PRESENT SEVEN APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AT THE INSTA NCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-13, AHMEDABAD D ATED 11.07.2016 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2013-14. THE SOLITARY ISSUE INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE VISI TED 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. 2. THE REGISTRY HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE APPEALS FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE TIME BARRED BY 17 DAYS. IT IS PERTINENT TO OBSERVE THAT WE HAVE HEARD ROUGHLY 160 APPEALS OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS INCLUDING A FEW B USINESS CONCERNS AND, OUT OF THESE, SOME OF THE APPEALS ARE TIME BARRED INCLU DING THE ABOVE REFERRED APPEALS FILED BY SMT. HIRABEN SHANKARBHAI PATEL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AFFIDAVITS EXPLAINING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS. IT HAS ITA NOS. 2777 TO 2783/AHD/2016 SMT. HIRABEN SHANKARBHAI PATEL VS. ACIT AYS: 2007-08 TO 2013-14 - 2 BEEN PLEADED BY HIM THAT SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HAS IMPOSED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT FOR NON-COMPLIAN CE OF EACH NOTICE AND HE HAS ISSUED MULTIPLE NOTICES ON THE FAMILY MEMBERS, IT W AS CUMBERSOME EXERCISE TO COMPILE THE DETAILS OF ALL DOCUMENTS AND PREPARE TH E APPEAL IN TIME. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, WE A RE CONVINCED THAT HE WAS PROHIBITED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM FILING THE APPE ALS WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME; THEREFORE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS AND PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEALS ON MERITS. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THE CASE ARE THAT A SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132(4) OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE GROUP CASES OF IN DIA GREEN REALITY PVT. LTD. ON 15.03.2013. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED UNDER TH E SEARCH OPERATION AND NOTICES UNDER SECTION 153C R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT W ERE ISSUED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) ALONGWITH QUESTIONNAIRE FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR WA S ISSUED ON 14.10.2014 WHICH WAS NOT REPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, SEPARATE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED FOR VIOLATION OF EACH NOTICE. LD. A SSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED SEVERAL PENALTY ORDERS DATED 17.04.2015 FOR VIOLATI ON OF NOTICE DATED 14.10.2014. A PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- IN EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FO R VIOLATION OF EACH NOTICE WAS IMPOSED UPON THE ASSESSEE. 4. LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DISPOSED O F THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 11.07.2016 CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT IN EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN NOW APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. 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. ITA NOS. 2777 TO 2783/AHD/2016 SMT. HIRABEN SHANKARBHAI PATEL VS. ACIT AYS: 2007-08 TO 2013-14 - 3 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 HUSB AND, SHRI SHANKARBHAI PATEL WAS HANDLING THE ENTIRE GROUP AND HE WAS NOT KEEPIN G GOOD HEALTH. HE PASSED AWAY ON 03.11.2014. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT POSSESSIN G ANY DETAILS AND IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR HER TO LOCATE THE DETAILS IN SUCH A SH ORT TIME. CONSIDERING THESE TWO ASPECTS, VIZ., NO ADDITION WAS MADE IN FIVE ASSESSM ENT YEARS, I.E., 2007-08 TO 2010-11 & 2013-14, ILLNESS AND ULTIMATE DEATH OF HE R HUSBAND WHO WAS CONDUCTING THE PROCEEDINGS AT THAT TIME, WE ARE SAT ISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT REASONS FOR NOT COMPLYING W ITH THE NOTICES AND SHE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE VISITED WITH PENALTY. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DELETE THE PENALTY. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 28 TH JULY, 2017 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YA DAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED, 28/07/2017 **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