Rajesh Jayantilal Patel, RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-2, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 43/RJT/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7755 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVI PRAKASH D R
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT , ! '# $ , % ! & ' BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER #./ I.T.A. NOS.42, 43, 44 & 45/RJT/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012 -13) RAJESH JAYANTILAL PATEL, C/O. R.K. SHUKLA & CO., 201, 2 ND FLOOR, OPERA TOWER, JAWAHAR ROAD, RAJKOT-360 001. / VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, RAJKOT. !* # ./ + # ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AACPF 0489 L ( *, / APPELLANT ) .. ( -*, / RESPONDENT ) *, . / APPELLANT BY : -- NONE -- -*, / . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAVI PRAKASH, D.R. 0 1 / 2 / DATE OF HEARING 1 5 /03/2018 34 / 2 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09 / 0 4 /201 8 5 / O R D E R PER MAHAVIR PRASAD JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE FOUR CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED AT T HE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE APPELLATE ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-11, AHMEDABAD [ CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 10/11/2016 ARISING IN THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED UNDER S.271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTE R REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') DATED 24/09/2015 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS (AYS) 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. ITA NOS.42, 43, 44 & 45/RJT/2017 RAJESH JAYANTILAL PATEL VS. ACIT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012- 13 - 2 - 2. SINCE IN ALL FOUR APPEALS GROUNDS OF APPEALS ARE SAME ONLY ASSESSMENT YEARS AND FIGURES ARE CHANGE. THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE WOULD LIKE TO DISPOSE OF ALL FOUR A PPEALS TOGETHER. 3. THE GROUND OF APPEALS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ALL FOUR APPEALS READ AS UNDER:- THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) I N THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, ERRED IN CONF IRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.9,80,838/- (A.Y. 2009-10), RS.14,78,529/- (A. Y. 2010-11), RS.6,78,806/- (A.Y. 2011-12) AND RS.14,97,016/- (A. Y. 2012-13) IMPOSED U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WITHOUT PROPER APP RECIATION OF THE FACTS. 4. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE SEARCH ACTI ON U/S.132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 30/05/2012. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTIC E U/S.153A, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN INCOME OF RS.34,90,900/- WHICH I NCLUDED UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE FORM OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.33,53,730/-. THIS AMOUNT OF RS.33,53,730/- WA S TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME AS THE SAID INCOME WAS OFFERED O NLY IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S.153A OF THE ACT. PENALTY PROCEEDI NGS U/S.271(1)(C) WERE INITIATED. 5. THEREAFTER, LD. ACIT ISSUED A NOTICE U/S.271(1)( C) OF THE ACT AND ASSESSEE REPLIED THAT NEITHER CONCEALED THE PA RTICULARS OF HIS INCOME NOR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF SUCH INCOME AND ASSESSEE HAS FULLY AND TRULY DISCLOSED HIS INCOME I N RETURN OF INCOME. WHATEVER RETURN INCOME HAS BEEN ASSESSED U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 153 OF THE ACT. 6. LD. ACIT NOT CONVINCED WITH THE REPLY FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE. HENCE, HE LEVIED THE PENALTY OF RS.9,80,838/-. ITA NOS.42, 43, 44 & 45/RJT/2017 RAJESH JAYANTILAL PATEL VS. ACIT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012- 13 - 3 - 7. THEREAFTER, APPELLANT PREFERRED FIRST STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT BECAUSE OF SOME REASON THE APPEL LANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) AND LD. CIT(A) PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER FOR CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY. 8. TODAY BEFORE US APPELLANT MOVED AN APPLICATION F OR ADJOURNMENT. WE ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE REASONS FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. HENCE, WE DECLINE THE ADJOURNMENT APPL ICATION. 9. WE NOTICE THAT CIT(A) HAS PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER FOR NON- ATTENDANCE FROM ASSESSEE. IT IS NOT KNOWN AS TO WHE THER SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS PROVIDED OR NOT. IN THE LARGER INTE REST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE EX-PARTE ORDER FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION AFTER REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESS EE. NEEDLESS TO SAY, ASSESSEE SHALL DILIGENTLY COMPLY WITH THE HEAR ING WITHOUT ANY DEMUR. 10. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 09/04/2018 SD/- SD/- ( ) ($ ) ! % ! ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 09/04/2018 PRITI YADAV, SR. PS ITA NOS.42, 43, 44 & 45/RJT/2017 RAJESH JAYANTILAL PATEL VS. ACIT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012- 13 - 4 - / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *, / THE APPELLANT 2. -*, / THE RESPONDENT. 3. #8# 2 92 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 92 () / THE CIT(A)-11, AHMEDABAD. 5. :; < %2%0 , , /DR,ITAT, RAJKOT 6. < = 1 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, - :2 %2 //TRUE COPY// / ! '#$ ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ! $%! &, / ITAT, RAJKOT 1. DATE OF DICTATION 19/03/2018(DICTATION-PAD 2 P AGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 19/03/2018 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER