SRI MRINAL, RANCHI V. DCIT CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

ITA 57/RAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9797 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MONDAL JCIT LD
• Assessee Lawyers: DEVESH PODDAR LD
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 148; 144

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO S . 57 & 58/RAN/2018 A.Y S 20 09 - 10 & 2010 - 11 SRI MRINAL BARIATU PAGE 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI (BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA , J.M. & DR.A.L.SAINI, A.M.) IT A NO. 57 /RAN/1 8 : ASSTT. YEAR : 20 09 - 10 ITA NO. 58 /RAN/18 : ASSTT. YEAR : 20 10 - 11 SRI MRINAL , BARIATU, RANCHI PAN: AAUPM580 0A VS D CIT, CIR - 2 , RANCHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DEVESH PODDAR, ADVOCATE, LD.AR RESPONDENT/ DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI P.K. MONDAL, J CIT/ LD.DR DATE OF HEARING : 11 - 01 - 2 019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 - 0 4 - 2019 ORDER PER BENCH : THE CAPTIONED TWO AP PEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS), R ANCHI , BOTH DATED 22 - 12 - 2017 , WHICH IN TURN ARISE OUT OF SEPARATE PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (DCIT, CIR - 2, RANCHI) U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT ), BOTH DATED 08 - 03 - 2016 . 2. SINCE THESE TWO APPEAL S PERTAINED TO THE SAME ASSESSE, DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS , COMMON AND IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED, THEREFORE, THESE HAVE BEEN CLUBBED 2 ITA NO S . 57 & 58/RAN/2018 A.Y S 20 09 - 10 & 2010 - 11 SRI MRINAL BARIATU PAGE 2 AND HEARD TOGETHER AND A CONSOLIDATED ORDER IS BEING PASSED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 3. AT THE OUTSE T ITSELF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESEE FILED ADJOURNMENT ON BEHALF OF ASSESSE E AND SOUGHT TIME OF 10 DAYS FOR FILING OF REQUIRED DOCUMENTS. ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 07 - 03 - 20 16 THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED BANK ACCOUNT AND STATEMENTS AND AGAIN REQUESTED ADJOURNMENT FOR A WEEK VIDE PAGE - 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE PART COMPLIANCE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THEREFORE PENALTY SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT . 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESEE DID NOT SUBMIT ALL THE DOCUMENTS AS REQUIRED BY THE AO. HE MADE PART COMPLIANCE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE THE PENALTY SHOULD BE LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(B). 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD MADE PART COMPLIANCE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE S ISSUED U/S. 142(1) OF THE ACT . WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE WAS CARRIED ON BY TH E AO U/S. 148 R.W.S 143(3) OF THE ACT . DURING THE ASSESSMENT STAGE, THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE AO FROM TIME TO TIME. HOWEVER, ON SOME OCCASIONS WHERE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS FIXED BY THE AO , THE ASSESSE E COULD NOT APPEAR BEFO RE THE AO. THEREFORE, THE AO IMPOSED PENALT IES U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT OF RS.3 0,000/ - EACH FOR BOTH THE A.YS (2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) UNDER CONSIDERATION IN RESPECT OF NON - COMPLIANCE OF THE SAID STATUTORY NOTICE S ISSUED U/S. 142(1) OF THE ACT . WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PART COMPLIANCE AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS NOT PASSED U/S. 144 OF THE ACT , T HEREFORE, RELYING ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE 3 ITA NO S . 57 & 58/RAN/2018 A.Y S 20 09 - 10 & 2010 - 11 SRI MRINAL BARIATU PAGE 3 DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAM COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD (2000) 246 ITR 560(DEL), WHEREIN I T WAS HELD THAT SINCE THE ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE AO U/S. 143(3) AND NOT 144 OF THE ACT . THIS MEANS THE SUBSEQUENT COMPLIANCE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WAS CONSIDERED AS GOOD COMPLIANCE AND DEFAULT COMMITTED EARLIER WERE IGNORED BY AO. T HEREFORE, I T WILL BE DEEMED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD MADE PROPER COMPLIANCE AND PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED. THEREFORE, KEEPING IN MIND ABOVE STATED FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , WE DELETE THE IMPUGNED PENALTIES OF RS. 30, 000/ - EACH F OR BOTH THE A.Y S 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSE IN BOTH THE APPEALS FOR THE A.YS 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11 ARE ALLOWED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 - 0 4 - 2019 SD/ - SD/ - ( S. S. GODARA ) (DR. A.L.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 05 - 0 4 - 2019 *PRADIP (SR.PS) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT/ ASSESSEE: SRI MRINAL, FLAT NO. 406, HERITAGE APARTMENT, BARIATU, RANCHI - 834001. 2 THE RESPONDENT/ DEPARTMENT : D CIT , CIRCLE - 2, RANCHI . 3. THE CIT - , 4. THE CIT(A) - , 5. DR, RANCHI BENCHES, RANCH I TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SENIOR P.S ITAT, RANCHI BENCHES