IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 604(ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 PAN :AABPU4726E SMT. REKHA UPPAL VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, PROP. M/S. RSD UPPAL & CO. WARD 3(2), FEROZEPUR. ANAJ MANDI, ZIRA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH. SUDHIR SEHGAL & A.K. JUNEJA RESPONDENT BY:SH. TARSEM LAL, DR DATE OF HEARING:09/08/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:28/08/2012 ORDER PER BENCH ; THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), BATHINDA, DATED 23.09.2011 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL: 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), BATHINDA U/S 250(6) IS AGAINST FACTS AND LAW. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND LAW IN U PHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE LD. AO U/S 271(1)(C) IMPOSING PENALTY OF RS.33,430/-. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEARD OR DISPOS ED OFF. ITA NO.604(ASR)/2011 2 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT WHEREAS AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT OUT OF TWO ADDITIONS U/S 68 OF RS.14,00, 000/- AND RS.2,10,000/- OUT OF WHICH BY DELETING THE ADDITION TO THE TUNE OF RS.14,70,000/-, REMAINING ADDITION OF RS.1,40,000/- (RS.65,000 AND RS.75,000 REPRESENTING UNEXPLAINED CREDITS IN RESPECT OF SMT. JYOTI SEHGAL AND SMT. CHETANA SEHGAL) WAS CONFIRMED IN THE FIRST APPEAL BY THE LD . CIT(A), BATHINDA. WHEREAS THE APPELLANTS 2 ND APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT, AMRITSAR DID NOT FIND FAVOUR, AND THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL HAS ALSO BEEN D ISMISSED IN THE RESULT THAT THE FINDIGNS OF THE CIT(A), BATHINDA HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED IN TOTO. IN ORDER TO DISPOSE OF CONCEALMENT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED IN THIS CASE, IN RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE PENALTY NOTICE, THE REPLY F ILED BY THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHICH STANDS REPRODUC ED IN VERBATIM AT PAGE 5 OF THE PENALTY ORDER. BUT THE SAME DID NOT FAVOUR W ITH A.O. WHO OBSERVED THAT THE JUDGMENTS QUOTED BY THE APPELLANT IN ITS S UPPORT HAVE ALSO NO RELEVANCE IN THE PRESENT CASE. THUS, BY INVOKING TH E EXPLANATION 1 BELOW SECTION 271(1)(C), THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS IMPOSE D A MINIMUM LEVIABLE PENALTY @ 100% OF THE TAX SOUGHT TO BE AVOIDED AMOU NTING TO RS.33,430/-. 4. THE LD. CIT(A), CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THE EXPLANATION WITH REGARD TO THE SAID CASH CREDIT IN THE FORM OF ATTESTED ITA NO.604(ASR)/2011 3 AFFIDAVIT, COPY OF SAVING BANK ACCOUNT AND EVIDENCE OF REFUNDING THE SAID MONEY. NO EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO CONCEALMENT OF IN COME HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, NO PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, CAN BE LEVIED. ACCORDINGLY, T HE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO CANCEL THE PENALTY SO LEVIED AND THE ORDER OF THE L D. CIT(A) IS REVERSED. ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.604(ASR)/2011 IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28TH AUGUST, 2012. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 28 TH AUGUST, 2012 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SMT. REKHA UPPAL PROP. M/S. RSD UPPAL & CO. ZIRA. 2. THE ITO, WARD 3(2), FEROZEPUR. 3. THE CIT(A), BATHINDA. 4. THE CIT, BATHINDA. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.