K.Periasamy, Tiruppur V. ITO, Tiruppur

ITA 582/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90609 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . ! , # $% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D. KARUNAKAR RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.582/MDS/2014 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI K. PERIASAMY, KARAIKATTU THOTTAM, PERUNTHOLUVU POST, GOUNDEMPALAYAM, P.K. PALAYAM, TIRUPUR 641 665. PAN : AFSPP 9738 H V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(6), TIRUPUR. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SH. T. BANUSEKAR, CA ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT 0 . 1# / DATE OF HEARING : 01.06.2015 23( . 1# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.06.2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, COIMBAT ORE, DATED 10.01.2014, CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 I.T.A. NO.582/MDS/14 2. SH. T. BANUSEKAR, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITI ON OF ` 5,73,890/- IN RESPECT OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE INTEREST ACCRUED ON THE DEPOSITS. ACCORDIN G TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED ` 3,00,000/- TOWARDS OPENING CASH BALANCE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT FURNISHED ANY INACCURATE PARTICULARS. ACCORDING TO THE LD. R EPRESENTATIVE, INADVERTENTLY THE ASSESSEE OMITTED TO INCLUDE THE I NTEREST INCOME OF ` 2,24,744/- FROM THE FIXED DEPOSITS. HOWEVER, THE S AME WAS ALSO OFFERED FOR TAXATION. THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FURTH ER SUBMITTED THAT A CASH DEPOSIT WAS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OUT OF TH E DRAWINGS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM IN W HICH THE ASSESSEE WAS A PARTNER. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRE SENTATIVE, THE CIT(APPEALS) WITHOUT INDEPENDENTLY APPRECIATING THE MATTER, CONFIRMED THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, THE LD. D EPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICE R FOUND THAT A CASH DEPOSIT IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED FOR EXPLANATION W ITH REGARD TO DEPOSIT MADE IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN SATISFACTORILY THE SOURCE FOR MAKING CASH D EPOSIT. THEREFORE, 3 I.T.A. NO.582/MDS/14 THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT O F ` 3,00,000/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME. THE LD. D.R. FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECEIVED INTEREST FROM FIXED DEPOSITS AND KCC DEPOSITS. THE INTEREST WAS NOT DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., ANOTHER ADDITION OF ` 2,53,890/- WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EX PLANATION, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRM ED THE SAME. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE PENALTY ORDER IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED THE INT EREST INCOMES OF ` 2,24,744/- FROM FIXED DEPOSITS AND ALSO ` 29,146/- FROM SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH WERE OFFERED FOR TAXATION BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MADE CASH DEPOSIT TO THE EXTE NT OF ` 29,37,300/-. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE A N ADDITION OF ONLY ` 3,00,000/-. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE MONEY DRAWN FROM PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S SRI CHAKRA COLOURS WAS USED FOR DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, NO MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE CASH WITHDRAWN FROM THE PAR TNERSHIP FIRM WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE CIT(APPEALS ) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE OFFERED ` 3,00,000/- TOWARDS OPENING CASH BALANCE. THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT DISCUSSED ANYTHING ABOUT T HE 4 I.T.A. NO.582/MDS/14 CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE P ARTICULARS. UNLESS AND UNTIL THE CIT(APPEALS) CAME TO A CONCLUS ION THAT THE ASSESSEE CONCEALED ANY PART OF INCOME OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS, PENALTY CANNOT BE LEVIED. THE CIT(APP EALS) WITHOUT MUCH OF DISCUSSION CAME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE AS SESSING OFFICER BROUGHT OUT ON RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT INT END TO DISCLOSE THE FIXED DEPOSIT ACCOUNT AND KCC ACCOUNT AT CORPOR ATION BANK. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) BEING THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, HAS TO RE-APPR ECIATE THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND IS EXPECTED TO RECORD A SPE CIFIC FINDING, THE NATURE OF INCOME WHICH WAS CONCEALED BY THE ASSESSE E OR THE PARTICULARS WHICH WERE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ACCURATELY. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT( APPEALS) HAS TO APPLY HIS MIND AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER SPECIFICAL LY BRINGING OUT HOW THE INCOME WAS CONCEALED OR HOW THE INACCURATE PARTICULARS WERE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE CIT(APPE ALS) HAS NOT DISCUSSED ANYTHING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THIS TRIB UNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER IS TO BE REMITTE D BACK TO THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR RECONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUE IS RE MITTED BACK TO CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL RECONSIDER TH E ISSUE AFRESH AND BRING ON RECORD THE NATURE OF INCOME WHICH WAS NOT DISCLOSED TO 5 I.T.A. NO.582/MDS/14 THE DEPARTMENT / CONCEALED BY THE ASSESSEE OR THE I NACCURATE PARTICULARS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTE R HE WILL DECIDE THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 30 TH JUNE, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ! ) ( ... ) (D. KARUNAKAR RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 30 TH JUNE, 2015. KRI. . ,167 87(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 91 () /CIT(A)-I, COIMBATORE 4. 0 91 /CIT-III, COIMBATORE 5. 7: ,1 /DR 6. ' ; /GF.