Aruna Theatres & Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI V. ITO (OSD), CHENNAI

ITA 46/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8713 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-01-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 27

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! ' , # '$ BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . /ITA NO. 46/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 ARUNA THEATRES & ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NO.3, PILLAR ROAD, ASHOK NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 083. PAN AADCA2018C ( /APPELLANT) V. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER(OSD), MEDIA CIRCLE-I, CHENNAI. RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, FCA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHIVA SRINIVAS, JCIT ! / DATE OF HEARING : 22.08.2016 '# ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.08.2016 % / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DATED 19 .10.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. - - ITA 46/16 2 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AT 5,81,661/-. 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILE D ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2005-06 ADMITTING A TOTAL INCO ME OF 23,53,690/- ON 31.10.2005. THE CASE WAS COMPLETED U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT ON 19.11.2008 DETER MINING THE AX AT 10,51,101/-. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE ALSO INITIA TED FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE A SSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS)-VI, CHE NNAI, WHO DIRECTED THE AO TO DECIDE THE ISSUE OF NON-DEDUCTIO N OF TAX AT SOURCE ON (I) FRIG SALES, (2) FREEZE AND BREEZE AND (3) INTEREST PAID TO L. CHINNAMMAL. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCED AX, WHICH LEADS TO PENALTY, PENALTY WAS LEVIED TO THE T UNE OF 5,81,661/-. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, AGAIN, THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), WHO CONFIRMED THE O RDER OF THE PENALTY BY OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS : 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND ASSESSEES SUBMISSION AND AFTER DUE CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF VARIOUS CASE LAWS CITED BY THE - - ITA 46/16 3 ASSESSEE WHICH I FIND ARE DISTINGUISHABLE AND THEREFORE IN VIEW OF EXPLANATION 1(B) TO SECTION 27 1, ARRIVE TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHE D INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVYIN G PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) @ 100% FOR ASSESSEE FURNISHIN G INACCURATE PARTICULARS THEREBY CONCEALING THE INCOM E. HENCE THE GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). IN OUR OPINION, THERE I S NO ADDRESSING OF THE ISSUE PROPERLY BY THE CIT(APPEALS) AND HIS O RDER IS CRYPTIC. BEING SO, WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO UPHOLD THE OR DER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), AS IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE RULE S OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) CANNOT BE U PHELD AS THIS ORDER IS CURSORY AND LACONIC WITHOUT GOING INTO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES. AS SUCH, WE ARE INCLINED TO REMIT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR FRESH C ONSIDERATION. - - ITA 46/16 4 ACCORDINGLY, THIS ISSUE IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 22 ND OF AUGUST, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( $% & ) ( ' ( ) $ ) *%+,-,./01,2345,.62,+778,293 : ;< /JUDICIAL MEMBER ! ;<=>>70.?,.?@A1BA2 ': /CHENNAI, C; /DATED, THE 22 ND AUGUST, 2016. MPO* ;D EFGF /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. H3 /CIT(A) 4. H /CIT 5. FIJ K /DR 6. JLM /GF.