IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE: SHRI N. S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.336/JODH/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, RIDMALSAR PAN :AABTK0295N VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, SRI GANGANAGAR APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI RAKESH GUPTA, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. L. MOURYA, DR DATE OF HEARING: 17.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17.03.16 O R D E R PER: GEORGE MATHAN, J.M. : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A), BIKANER DATED 25-03-2015 PASSED IN APPEAL NO.280/BKN/2010-11 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 CONFIRMING LEVY OF PENA LTY U/S 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT. 2. SHRI RAKESH GUPTA LEARNED AR REPRESENTED ON BEH ALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI S. L. MOURYA, LEARNED DR REPRESENTED ON BE HALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT THE ORI GINAL ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE CAME TO BE COMPLETED ON AN INC OME OF RS.16,69,025/- AND AFTER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THE NET INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE CAME TO 2 ITA NO.336/JODH/2015 RS.2,75,050/-. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE AO HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A CHARITABLE TRUST AND AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATION U/S 12A BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT, THE ASS ESSEE WAS UNDER BONA FIDE BELIEF THAT ITS TAXABLE INCOME WAS NILL. IT W AS A SUBMISSION THAT THE AO DID NOT CONSIDER THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AN D LEVIED A PENALTY OF RS.1.00 LACS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ON APPEAL TH E LEARNED CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT MENS- REA WAS NOT ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1) (C) OF T HE ACT. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE AO HAS NOT SPECIFIED AS TO WHETHER PENALTY IS BEING LEVIED FOR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR F OR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) CONFIRMING THE PENALTY WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED TH E ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE LEARNED CIT (A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PERU SAL OF THE PENALTY ORDER AS ALSO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DOES NOT SHOW AS TO WHETHER THE PENALTY IS BEING LEVIED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONCEALMENT OF I NCOME OR FOR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. IN THESE CIRCUMST ANCES, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SUBHASH GUPTA VS DCIT, 85 ITD 167 (JAIPUR) WE DELET E THE PENALTY AS CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A). 3 ITA NO.336/JODH/2015 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17-03-2016. SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JODHPUR, DATED: 17 TH MARCH, 2016 LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/ DEKA/- -- - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (A) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, JODHPUR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 17.03.16 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 17.03.16 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 18.03.16 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 18.03. 16 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 18.03.16 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17.03.16 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 18.03.16 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER