Shri Pankaj Thakorbhai Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 2802/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5819 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANTONY PARIATH
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS. 2799 TO 2802/AHD/2014 / A.Y. 2007-08 TO 2010-11 RESPECTIVELY PANKAJ THAKORBHAI PATEL, 11, SANTOOR BUNGLOW, NR. ADESH BUNGALOW, AMBLI-BOPAL ROAD, AMBLI, AHMEDABAD-58 PAN : AJEPP 6174 F VS THE ITO, WARD-6(4), AHMEDABAD / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) BY ASSESSEE : NONE BY REVENUE : MR. ANTONY PARIATH, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 16/05/2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18/05/2017 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE FOUR ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2010-11 ARISE FROM THE CIT(A)-XI, AHMEDABADS COMMO N ORDER DATED 01.08.2014 PASSED IN CASE NO.CIT(A)XI/190,191,192,1 93/WD.6(4)/ 2013-14, AFFIRMING ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION IMPOS ING PENALTIES OF RS.27,371/-, RS.33,990/-, RS.21,413/- AND RS.41,603 /-; RESPECTIVELY IN PROCEEDINGS U/S 271B OF THE ACT. 2. CASES CALLED TWICE; NONE APPEARS AT ASSESSEES B EHEST DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. ASSESSEES COUNSEL HAS FILED AN ADJOURNMENT ITA NOS. 2799 TO 2802/AHD/2014 PANKAJ THAKORBHAI PATEL VS. ITO A.YS.2007-08 TO 2010-11 - 2 - PETITION SEEKING POSTPONEMENT OF HEARING. NOBODY, HOWEVER, RISES UP TO PURSUE THE SAME IN THE COURSE OF HEARING. WE THUS REJECT ASSESSEES COUNSELS ADJOURNMENT PETITION. THESE F OUR CASES ARE, THEREFORE, TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON MERITS. 3. HEARD LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. CASE FIL E PERUSED. RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE IN A VERY NARROW COM PASS. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES PENALIZE THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE I MPUGNED PENALTY PROVISION OF SECTION 271B OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF HIS FAILURE IN GETTING HIS ACCOUNTS AUDITED U/S 44AB OF THE ACT. WE SOUGHT TO KNOW FROM LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ABOUT THE PRECISE REASON OF ASSESSEES ABOVE STATED LAPSE. HE INFORMS US THA T THE ASSESSEES TURNOVER CROSSES THE REVENUES RELEVANT THRESHOLD L IMIT ENVISAGED U/S 44AB OF THE ACT ONLY AFTER INCLUDING HIS UNDISC LOSED INCOME IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS WHICH STAND ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS INCOME. HE TAKES US TO THE RELEVANT CAS E FILE(S) INDICATING THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE NOT DECLARED HIS UNDISCLOSED I NCOME IN THE NATURE OF INVESTMENT AT THE FIRST INSTANCE. THESE I NVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE IN VARIOUS INSURANCE POLICIES. WE OBSERVE IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS THAT ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECOR DED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN QUESTION IN HIS BOOKS, THERE WAS NO QUEST ION OF ENSURING COMPLIANCE OF SECTION 44AB OF THE ACT SO AS TO GET RELEVANT BOOKS AUDITED. WE THUS TREAT ASSESSEES EXPLANATION OF NO T HAVING COMPLIED WITH THE ABOVE CONDITION OF GETTING HIS BOOKS AUDIT ED U/S 44AB OF THE ACT AS A BONA FIDE ONE AND DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES IN THE ITA NOS. 2799 TO 2802/AHD/2014 PANKAJ THAKORBHAI PATEL VS. ITO A.YS.2007-08 TO 2010-11 - 3 - FOUR ASSESSMENT YEARS IN QUESTION. THESE FOUR ASSE SSEES APPEALS ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL FOUR APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 18 TH MAY , 201 7 AT AHMEDABAD SD/- SD/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (S.S. GODAR A) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED 18/05/2017 *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. / / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ' (, / ITAT, AHMEDABAD