Sh Sukhdev Singh, Amritsar. V. The Income Tax Officer, Amritsar.

ITA 608/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5550 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 27-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.608/(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 PAN: BLWPS6403D SUKHDEV SINGH HOUSE NO. 1402, GAWAL MANDI, RAM TIRTH ROAD, AMRITSAR VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, AMRITSAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. P. N. ARORA (A DV.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. CHARAN DASS (D.R.) DATE OF HEARING: 27.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31.07.201 7 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR DATED 02.09.2016 FOR ASST. YEAR: 2008-09. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN AS MANY AS FOUR GROUNDS O F APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CRUX OF THE GRIEVANCE OF ASSESSEE IS T HE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A), BY WHICH HE HAS CONFIRMED A PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- WHICH WAS IMPOSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ON THE B ASIS OF CASH DEPOSITS ITA NO. 608(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 2 IN THE BANK. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COOPERAT E WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETE D U/S 144 OF THE ACT AND ADDITION WAS MADE TO THE EXTENT OF RS.32,52,231 /-. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), AND GOT RELIEF O F RS.26,61,204/-. IN THE MEAN TIME, ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE FOR IMPO SITION OF PENALTY U/S271(1)(B), AND DATE OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WAS F IXED FOR 31.12.2010, AND FINALLY THE PENALTY WAS IMPOSED VIDE ORDER DAT ED 18.08.2015. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME AND, THER EFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSEE WAS AN UNEDUCATED PERSON AND WAS LIVING IN A VILLAGE NEAR AMRITSAR. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE FIRST NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS ISSU ED ON 17.08.2010, AND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 15.12.2010 AND, THEREFO RE, THERE WAS NOT A REASONABLE TIME WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE DID APPE AR ON 27.09.2010 TOOK THE ADJOURNMENT FOR APPOINTMENT OF A COUNSEL B UT COULD NOT APPOINT THE SAME AND THEREFORE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S 144. 5. THE LD. DR, HOWEVER, HEAVILY PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THOUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT FIRST NOTICE U/S 143 (2) WAS ISSUED ON 17.08.2010. THIS NOTICE REMAINED UNCOMPLIED WITH. T HEN AGAIN, TWO NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND WHICH ALSO REMAINED UNCOMPL IED WITH, HOWEVER, ITA NO. 608(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 3 ON 27.09.2010, THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND SOUGHT ADJ OURNMENT AND THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR 04.10.2010. THEN AGAIN ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 ON 15.12.2010. SIMULTANEOUSLY STARTED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271( 1)(B). IN THE MEANTIME ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AN D GOT SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF AND THE REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST LD. CIT(A) S ORDER WAS ALSO DISMISSED. AFTER THE RECEIPT OF TRIBUNAL ORDER, THE PENALTY CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS AGAIN STARTED AND WAS FIXED FOR HEARIN G ON 23.07.2015, AND PENALTY WAS IMPOSED ON 18.08.2015. IN THE RENEWED P ENALTY PROCEEDINGS ALSO THE ASSESSEE DID NOT GET SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNIT Y TO DEFEND THE PENALTY. THE PERIOD BETWEEN ISSUE OF FIRST NOTICE ON 17.08.2 010 AND COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT ON 15.12.2010 IS ALSO NOT A REASONABLE P ERIOD AND ASSESSEE CANNOT BE FASTENED WITH THE LIABILITY FOR NOT APPEA RING SPECIFICALLY, IN VIEW OF THE FACT, THAT ASSESSEE IS AN UNEDUCATED PERSON AS IS APPARENT FROM HIS SIGNATURES AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT AS SESSEE LIVES IN A VILLAGE NEAR AMRITSAR. WE FURTHER FIND THE ASSESSEE HAD GOT SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF FROM THE LD. CIT(A) AND WHICH WAS UPHELD BY HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ALSO. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSES SEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.07.2017. SD/- SD/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31.07.2017. /GP/SR. PS . COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: ITA NO. 608(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 4 (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER