Laxmi Narain & Sons, HUF, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4607/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61660 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 09-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

I.T.A.NO.4607/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O. P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.4607/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 LAXMI NARAIN & SONS, HUF, VS ITO, WARD 39(4), 10467/1, BAGICHHI ALLAUDDIN, NEW DELHI. SDAR THANA ROAD, NEW DELHI. (PAN: AABHL7601P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT B Y: SHRI V. PRATAP, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GAUR AV DUDEJA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 09.11.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.11.2015 O R D E R PER CHANDRAMOHAN GARG, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XXVIII, NEW DELHI DATED 26.9.2011 IN APPEAL NO.05/2010-11FOR AY 2008-09. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER :- 1. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEAL), HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN SUSTAINI NG THE PENALTY WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE BASIS OF FACTS I.E. A. ORIGINAL RETURN FILED WITH PAN NUMBER SAAARP7129L. I.T.A.NO.4607/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 2 B. THE LD. A.O. HIMSELF HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R WITH PAN NO. AGRPA9377D. C. AT THE TIME OF IMPOSING OF PENALTY THE APPELLANT HA D A VALID PAN NO. I.E. AABHL7601P ISSUED ON 18.09.09. 3. WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND CA REFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD BEFORE US. LD. AR SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FILING ITS RETURNS FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS AND SINCE LONG IT WAS FILING HIS INCOME TAX RETURN ON THE BASIS OF PAN NUMBER AS SAAARP7129L AND ON RECEIPT OF NOTICE FROM INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, IMMEDIATELY THE ASSESSEE APPLIED AND OBTAINED NEW PAN NO. ON 18.9.2009 AND THE RETURN FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10 WAS FILED ON 4.2.2010 WITH THE NEW PAN NUMBER. LD. AR VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED PENALTY ORDER WITH PAN NO. AGRPA9377D WHICH IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT AND SHOWS THE NEGLIGEN CE AND NON- APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE IMPOSING PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT). LD. AR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT BY MENTIONING WRONG PAN NO., THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT GET ANY BENEFIT AS IT IS REGULARLY FILING RETURN AND PAYING DUE TAX, THUS PE NALTY MAY BE CANCELLED. 4. LD. DR SUPPORTED THE PENALTY ORDER AND IMPUGNED ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE PENALTY WAS RIGHTLY LEVIED AS PER PROVISIO NS OF THE ACT. 5. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF ABOVE RIVAL SUBMISSI ONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT UNDISPUTEDLY THE ASSESSEE WAS REGULARLY FILING ITS RETURNS ON THE DISPUTED PAN NO. AND WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER POINTED OUT THE DEFECT, IT IMMEDIATELY I.T.A.NO.4607/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 3 APPLIED FOR NEW PAN NO. AND THE SAME WAS BONAFIDELY USED AND MENTIONED WHILE FILING ALL SUBSEQUENT RETURNS. THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT GET ANY BENEFIT BY FILING RETURN ON WRONG PAN NO. AND CONDUCT OF THE A SSESSEE SHOWS ITS BONAFIDE. 6. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT AS PER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 272B OF THE ACT, IF A PERSON QUOTES OR INTIMATES A NUMBER WHICH IS FALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEVE TO BE TRUE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY DIRECT SUCH P ERSON TO PAY PENALTY UNDER THIS PROVISION. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE PENALTY ORDER, WHILE IMPOSING PENALTY HAS CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS WRONGLY STATED ITS PAN NUMBER ON THE RETURN OF INCOME AND HAS ALSO NOT REPLIED TO THE SHOW CAUSE LETTER AND LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME BY MAKING A NEW CASE THAT IT WAS A WILLFUL MISTAKE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) ALSO HE LD THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT INFORM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ABOUT THE NEW PAN NUMB ER NOR MADE ANY REQUEST TO CORRECT HIS PAN NUMBER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09. THIS IS NOT A CORRECT APPROACH AS FOR IMPOSING PENALTY, IT HAS TO BE BROU GHT ON RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE QUOTED OR INTIMATED WRONG NUMBER WHICH WAS FALSE AND WHICH EITHER HE KNOWS OR BELIEVES TO BE FALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEV E TO BE TRUE BUT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAS NOT ALLEGED ANY FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE US ED FALSE NUMBER WHICH HE BELIEVES OR KNOWS TO BE FALSE OR DOES NOT BELIEVE T O BE TRUE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS WRITTEN IRRELEVANT PAN NO. IN THE PENAL TY ORDER AND THE LD. CIT(A) IGNORED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS NO T A CORRECT AND JUSTIFIED I.T.A.NO.4607/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 4 APPROACH FOR IMPOSING PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE ACT. HENCE, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DI RECTED TO DELETE THE PENALTY. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.11.2015. SD/- SD/- (O.P.KANT) (C.M. GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 27TH NOVEMBER, 2015 GS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR