Gobardhan Matia, V. ACIT, Bhubaneswar

ITA 573/CTK/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4329 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 8 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Document seized; Documents seized
• Section: 153A; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Gobardhan Matia, At/PO: Balda, Joda, Keonjhar PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench These are CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar both 244/11-12 against confirmation of levy of penalty u/s.271F of the Act the assessment year 2. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee was in the process of collecting the copy of the seized documents. It was submitted that consequently, prayer that the penalty as levied by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) may be deleted. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.573 & 574/CTK/20 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009 Gobardhan Matia, At/PO: Balda, Joda, Keonjhar Vs. ACIT, Circle Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AAWPM 1358 H (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sunil Mishra, AR Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT Date of Hearing : 22 /9 Date of Pronouncement : 22/9 O R D E R These are appeals filed by the assessee against the order 1, Bhubaneswar both dated 30.10.2013 in Appeal No against confirmation of levy of penalty u/s.271F of the Act the assessment years 2008-09 & 2009-10 . It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee was in the process of collecting the copy of the seized documents. It was submitted that the assessee had not filed the return of income. It was the prayer that the penalty as levied by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) may be deleted. Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CTK/2013 09 & 2009-10 ACIT, Circle -1(2), Bhubaneswar. Respondent) Sunil Mishra, AR : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR 9/2022 9/2022 filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld in Appeal Nos.243/11-12 & against confirmation of levy of penalty u/s.271F of the Act for It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee was in the process of collecting the copy of the seized documents. It was submitted that the assessee had not filed the return of income. It was the prayer that the penalty as levied by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) ITA Nos.573 & 574/CTK/2013 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Page2 | 3 3. In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the issue was covered against the assessee by the decision of this Co-ordinate bench in the case of Seerajudin & Co. in ITA Nos.575 & 576/CTK/2013 order dated 25.10.2019, wherein, the penalty u/s.271F of the Act has been confirmed by the Tribunal. It was further submitted that in para 4 of the order of the ld CIT(A), the ld CIT(A) has categorically given a finding that there has been no deficiency in service of notices and the AO has proper jurisdiction for issue of notice u/s.153A of the Act. He also submitted that the ld CIT(A) has given categorical finding that Xerox copies of the seized documents have been given to the assessee within 2-3 months. It was the submission that the order of the ld CIT(A) was liable to be upheld. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. The levy/confirmation of penalty is based on the facts of each case. There is no presumption that the assessee is willfully violating the law. It is an admitted fact that notice u/s.153A has been served on the assessee and the assessee is required to file the return within 30 days. It is also an admitted fact that for obtaining of the Xerox copies of the seized document, it took more than 2-3 months. Just by obtaining of xerox copies of seized documents, the return cannot be filed. It has to be co-related, verified, examined and reconciled before the return is filed. The filing of return beyond the due date is admittedly invalid return as there is no provision for filing the return belatedly once notice u/s. 153A has been issued. This being so, we are of the view that ITA Nos.573 & 574/CTK/2013 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Page3 | 3 the assessee had a valid ground for non-filing of return. Accordingly, penalty levied by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) is deleted. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 22/9/2022. Sd/-` sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 22/9/2022 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Gobardhan Matia, At/PO: Balda, Joda, Keonjhar 2. The Respondent: ACIT, Circle -1(2), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A)-1,. Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaenswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//