Kanchan Kumar Aron, Lucknow V. ITO Ward II (2), Lucknow

ITA 611/LKW/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6541 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 18-06-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S C AGRAWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 611/LKW/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1998 - 99 KANCHAN KUMAR ARON B - 3, DILKUSHA COLONY LUCKNOW V. INCOME TAX OFFICER - III(2) LUCKNOW PAN: ACUPA1665R (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. S. C. AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 18 0 6 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25 0 6 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.30,000/ - LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED IN SHORT THE ACT'). 2 . DURING THE COURS E OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER , DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS , ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH CERTAIN INFORMATION , BUT THE SAME COULD NOT BE COMPLIED WITH, AS THE RELEVANT INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID FACTS WERE DULY INFORMED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT BESIDES MAKING ADDITION THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO LEVIED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HA S FURTHER CONTENDED THAT WHEN THE REQUIRED INFORMATION PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : WERE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE FACTS WERE DULY INFORMED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR NON - COMPLIANCE OF THE DIRE CTION IS UNREASONABLE AND IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. 3 . THE LD. D.R. HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4 . HAVING GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF RECORD , WE FIND THAT THE ADDI TION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CONFIRMED , WITH REGARD TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS NO GRIEVANCE BUT HE HAS SERIOUS GRIEVANCE WITH REGARD TO THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT, AS IT WAS LEVIED FOR NON - COMPLIANCE OF THE DIRECTIONS O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS INFORMED THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE RELEVANT INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WITH HIM, PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LEVIED AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS FREE TO MAKE ADDIT ION W ITH REGARD TO WHICH INFORMATION WERE NOT FURNISHED. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DELETE THE PENALTY. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.6.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 25 TH JUNE , 2014 JJ: 1906 PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CI T(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )