M/s Chandur L. Sipahimalani, Kolkata V. ITO, Wd-29(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 604/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1919 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 30-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 273B; 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA (BENCH - C ) BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M . BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, I.T. A.NO.604 /KOL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 20 05 - 06 ORDER PER M. BALAGANESH , AM THIS IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - XVI , (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE LD. CIT(A)), KOLKATA, DT. 25.02 .2014, PASSED UNDER SECTION 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) AGAINST LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 05 - 06 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN UPHO LD ING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT IN TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IS THAT THE LD. AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD COMPLIED WITH THE STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT ON 6.7.2007 AND 1.10.2007 FIXING DATE OF HEARING ON 18.7.2007 AND 8 .10.2007 RESPECTIVELY FOR THE ASST . YEAR 2005 - 06. ACCORDINGLY THE LD. AO INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S M/S CHANDUR L. SIPAHIMALINI PAN: [AISPS1436C] - VS - ITO WARD 29(2), KOLKATA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APP ELLANT NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT SRI RAJAT KUMAR KUREEL, JCIT, SR. DR. DATE OF HEARING 30 .03.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05.04.2017 2 I.T. A.NO.604/KOL/2014 ASSE SSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 M/S. CHANDUR L. SIPAHIMALANI 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT AND SERVED THE SAID NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE FIXING THE HEARING ON 14.5.2008. THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE FOR THIS PENALTY HEARING A LSO. ACCORDINGLY THE LD. AO LEVIED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT AT THE RATE OF RS 10,000/ - FOR EACH FAILURE I.E . ON 18.7.2007 AND 8.10.2007 AND LEVIED PENALTY OF RS 20,000/ - THEREON. THE ASSESSEE REPLIED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT HE HAD COMPLETELY ENTRUSTED THE ENTIRE JOB OF HANDLING HIS INCOME TAX ASSESSMENTS BEFORE THE LD. AO TO HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. ON RECEIPT OF SCRUTINY NOTICE AND VARIOUS STATUTORY NOTICES U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT, ALL THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE LD. AO WERE PREPARED A ND PRODUCED BEFORE HER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE TOGETHER WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCES. SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON HER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AS SHE WAS TOTALLY OFF FROM OUTSIDE WORK SINCE NOVEMBER 2005 DUE TO HER ILL HEALTH AND SUFFERIN G FROM ACUTE DIABETES, HYPERTENSION AND POOR EYE VISION (60 TO 70% OF VISION WAS ALREADY LOST) . IT WAS ALSO PLEADED THAT THERE WAS NOBODY TO LOOK AFTER EXCEPT HER HUSBAND WHO WAS 74 YEARS O LD. AND ALSO SUFFERING FROM O LD. AGE DISEASE AND SINCE THEY WERE ISSUELESS, THEY WERE BOTH PASSING UNPLEASANT AND RESTLESS LIFE. IT WAS PLEADED THAT SHE HAS BEEN FILING HER INCOME TAX RETURNS FOR THE PAST 45 YEARS AND HAD ALWAYS COMPLIED WITH THE QUASI JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AND WAS TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON HER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES. IT WAS PLEADED THAT DESPITE HER GENUINE PREDICAMENTS, ALL THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE LD. AO WERE DUL Y FILED AND HAD CO - OPERATED IN SMOOTH COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. CIT(A) HOWEVER DID NOT APPRECIATE THESE CONTENTIONS AND UPHE LD. THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLO WING GROUNDS : - 1. THAT THE LD. A.O. IMPOSED A PENALTY OF RS.20,000/ - U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF 3 I.T. A.NO.604/KOL/2014 ASSE SSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 M/S. CHANDUR L. SIPAHIMALANI THE CASE WHICH IS UNJUST, BAD IN LAW, CRAVES DELETION AND AGAINST THE NATURAL LAW OF JUSTICE. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR. WE FIND FROM THE FACTS STATED HEREINABOVE, THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THAT SHE WAS DEPENDENT ON HER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR APPEARAN CE BEFORE THE LD. AO ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AND THAT SHE HAD FULLY PRODUCED THE NECESSARY DETAILS WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO HER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND SHE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE HAD NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. AO. WE F IND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS SUFFERING FROM ILL HEALTH AND CONSIDERING ALL O LD. AGE AND HER THEN FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCES AND MORE PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EVENTUALLY DIED, WE , IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, FEEL THAT REASONABLE CAUSE HAS BEEN DULY ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD AND HENCE IMMUNITY U/S 273B OF THE ACT IS TO BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. HENCE WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN DIRECTING THE LD. AO TO CANCEL THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 05.04.2017 SD/ - SD/ - [N. V. VASUDEVAN] [M. BALAGANESH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 05.04.2017 {SC SPS} 4 I.T. A.NO.604/KOL/2014 ASSE SSMENT YEARS: 2005 - 06 M/S. CHANDUR L. SIPAHIMALANI COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT/ASSESSEE - M/ S CHANDUR L. SIPAHIMALINI , 69, KANSARIPARA ROAD KOLKATA - 700 035. 2.RESPONDENT ITO WARD:29(2). KOLKATA. 3.CIT(A) - KOLKATA. 4.CIT , KOLKATA. 5.CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASST.T.REGISTRAR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES