ITO, Kota V. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, BARAN

ITA 550/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5190 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAGHUVIR SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDHARTH RANKA DHK
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF;D LN L; DS LE{K BEFORE:SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, J M VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 550 & 551/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 & 2006-07 THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD- KOTA ,KOTA CUKE VS. M/S. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI ATRU, DISTT. BARAN LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AAALS 0841 M VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY: SHRI RAGHUVIR SINGH , ADDL CIT -DR FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SIDDHARTH RANKA, ADVOCATE LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27/06/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 /06/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM BOTH THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), KOTA DATED 16-03 -2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND 2006-07 RESPECTIVELY. T HE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN RESPECTIVE APPEALS. ITA NO. 550/JP/2015-A.Y. 2005-06 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A), KOTA HAS ERRED IN:- ITA NO. 550/JP/2015 THE ITO (EXEMPTION), KOTA VS. M/S. KRISHI UPAJ MAND I SAMITI, ATRU, DISTT.BARAN . 2 (I) DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 11,87,177/- LEVIED BY THE AO IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS C ONCEALED INCOME BY GIVING INACCURATE PARTICULARS AND FAILED TO SUBMIT FORM NO. 10 (RULE 17) AS REQUIRED U/S 11(2) (A) OF THE ACT. (II) DELETING PENALTY THOUGH THE QUANTUM ADDITION O F RS. 35,56,967/- WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER DATED 30-12-2011 AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF TH E ACT. ITA NO. 551/JP/2015-A.Y. 2006-07 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A), KOTA HAS ERRED IN:- (I) DELETING THE PENALTY OF RS. 22,63,981/- LEVIED BY THE AO IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS C ONCEALED INCOME BY GIVING INACCURATE PARTICULARS AND FAILED TO SUBMIT FORM NO. 10 (RULE 17) AS REQUIRED U/S 11(2)(A) OF THE ACT. (II) DELETING PENALTY THOUGH THE ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT ADVA NCE OF RS. 16.00 LACS GIVEN TO RSAMB IN THE CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 30-12-2011 AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT (III) DELETING PENALTY AS THE QUANTUM ADDITION OF R S. 51,36,026/- WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER DATED 30-12-2011 AGAINST THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF TH E ACT. 2.1 FIRST OF ALL, WE TAKE UP THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 550/JP/2015 WHEREIN THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING LOSS OF INCOME OF RS. NIL ON 08-02-2006. THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT WA S MADE ON THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 43,06,898/-. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED T HAT THE AO VIDE HIS ITA NO. 550/JP/2015 THE ITO (EXEMPTION), KOTA VS. M/S. KRISHI UPAJ MAND I SAMITI, ATRU, DISTT.BARAN . 3 ORDER DATED 20-03-2013 IMPOSED PENALTY OF RS. 11,87 ,177/- U/S 271(1)(C ) OF THE ACT FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMIS SIONS OF THE PARTIES DELETED THE PENALTY OF RS. 11,87,177/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSION AND AOS FINDINGS. IN THIS CASE, THE ADDITION WAS CONFI RMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAIL ED TO SUBMIT FORM NO. 10 (RULE 17) AS REQUIRED U/S 11(2)( A) OF THE ACT. THIS MISTAKE CAN, AT THE BEST, BE TREATED AS A TECHNICAL MISTAKE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS. 271(1). THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE PENALTY OF RS. 11,87,177/-. 2.2 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO ON THIS ISSUE. HOWEVER, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESS EE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FEEL THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HA S TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE ASPECTS AS TO IMPOSITION OF P ENALTY BY THE AO BUT HE HAS RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT IN THIS CASE, THE ADDITIO N WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED T O SUBMIT FORM NO. 10 ITA NO. 550/JP/2015 THE ITO (EXEMPTION), KOTA VS. M/S. KRISHI UPAJ MAND I SAMITI, ATRU, DISTT.BARAN . 4 (RULE 17) AS REQUIRED U/S 11(2((A) OF THE ACT AND T REATED THIS MISTAKE AS A TECHNICAL MISTAKE. THE LD. CIT(A) OPINED THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AND THUS DIRECT ED THE AO DELETE PENALTY OF RS. 11,87,177/-. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE A RE DISMISSED. 2.4 NOW WE TAKE UP THE ANOTHER APPEAL OF THE REVENU E IN ITA NO. 551/JP/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WHEREI N THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO DELETE THE PENALTY OF RS. 22,63, 981/- CONSIDERING IT NOT A FIT CASE FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 2.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SINCE THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS SIMILAR TO ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, THE DECIS ION TAKEN THEREIN SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS IN THE APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. HENCE, THE APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IS DISMISSED AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS CONFIRMED.. ITA NO. 550/JP/2015 THE ITO (EXEMPTION), KOTA VS. M/S. KRISHI UPAJ MAND I SAMITI, ATRU, DISTT.BARAN . 5 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE RE VENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 -06-20 16. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ HKKXPUN (LALIET KUMAR) (BHAGCHAND ) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 29/06/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ITO (EXEMPTION), KOTA 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-M/S.KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, ATRU, DISTT. BARAN 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 550 & 551/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR