SHRI GOPAL BHARGAV, Bhopal V. The ACIT 1(1), Indore

ITA 614/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4437 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHD JAVED
• Assessee Lawyers: N D PATWA
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 147; 148; 10

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE .., ..!', #$ # !% BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ..& ./ I.T.A. NO. 614/IND/2014 ' ( )*( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 GOPAL BHARGAVA BHOPAL PAN AIVPB 9378H :: + / APPELLANT VS ACIT 1(1) BHOPAL :: ,-+ / RESPONDENT + . # /APPELLANT BY SRI ASHISH GOYAL & SHRI N.D.PATWA ,-+ . # / RESPONDENT BY SHRI MOHD. JAVED / ')0 . $ DATE OF HEARING 20.9.2016 1234* . $ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29 .09.2016 #5 / O R D E R PER SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-I, BHOPAL DATED 1.7.201 4. GOPAL BHARGAVA ITA NO. 614/IND/2014 2 2. THE ONLY GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT TH E LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.70,000/- IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT OUT OF THE TOTAL PENALTY OF RS.1,50,000/- AND ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 80,000/- ONLY WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT PROPERTLY . 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME FROM SALARY FROM M.P. GO VT. AS MLA, INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND INCOME FROM AGRI CULTURE. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON 11.12.2007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME O F RS.61,553/- AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.1,60,000/ -. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN IN HIS RETURN THAT HE WAS MLA AN D DRAWING SALARY FROM GOVT. OF MP AND HAS SHOWN SALAS RY INCOME INCLUDING ALLOWANCES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 10 OF THE ACT FOR RS. 60,000/- ON ACC OUNT OF CONSTITUENCY ALLOWANCE AND TELEPHONE ALLOWANCE. SIN CE THIS WAS A BELATED RETURN, TO REGULARISE THE ISSUE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER RECORDING REASONS ON THE BASIS OF INF ORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS RETURN, ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 OF T HE ACT ON GOPAL BHARGAVA ITA NO. 614/IND/2014 3 27.3.2008. IN COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 11.12.2007 MAY BE TREATED AS RETURN IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NO TICE U/S 143(2) AND 142(1) DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 AND ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF IN TEREST EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INTEREST INCOME ON ESTIMATE BASIS. HOWEVER, ON GETTING THE CERTIFICAT E FROM THE CONCERNED BANK IT WAS FOUND THAT THE INTEREST INCOM E WAS HIGHER THAN THE INCOME SHOWN IN THE RETURN. THEREFO RE, THE REVISED STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION AND BANK INTEREST OF RS.2,50,480/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS AGAIN ST RS.25,997/- SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED. T HE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER RECORDING THE SUBMISSIONS O F THE ASSESSEE COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147 READ WITH SECTION 143(3) DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.3,22,040/ - AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ALLOWED EXEMPTION OF CONS TITUENCY ALLOWANCE OF RS. 35,000/- ASSESSEE THE ASSESSEE WAS A MINISTER AND NOT ONLY MLA. THEREFORE, THE INTEREST INCOME WAS GOPAL BHARGAVA ITA NO. 614/IND/2014 4 ASSESSED AT RS.2,50,480/- AS AGAINST THE INCOME OF RS.25,977/- SHOWN IN THE RETURN. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR FURNISHING INACCU RATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS G IVEN SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BUT IN REPLY TO THE SAID SHOW CAUSE NO TICE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY REPLY. THEREFORE, THE PE NALTY WAS LEVIED. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT(A) REDUCED THE PENALTY TO RS. 70,000/-. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN RESTRI CTING THE PENALTY OF RS. 70,000/-. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LE ARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH A NY REPLY TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER AND AS SUCH THE PENALTY IS JUSTIFIED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. WE FIND THAT IN RE SPONSE TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH ANY REPLY. WE FURTHER FIN D THAT WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT ASKE D FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFOR E, IN OUR GOPAL BHARGAVA ITA NO. 614/IND/2014 5 VIEW, IT WOULD BE REASONABLE TO RESTORE THE ISSUE T O THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER ISSUING SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH HIS RE PLY. NEEDLESS TO STATE THAT IF THE ASSESSEE AGAIN FAILS TO FURNISH ANY REPLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS AT LIBERTY TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT AS PER LAW. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 2 9 SEPTEMBER, 2016. SD/- SD/- ( ..!') (..) #$ (O.P.MEENA) (D.T.GARASIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER 8'& / DATED : 29 SEPTEMBER, 2016. DN/ GOPAL BHARGAVA ITA NO. 614/IND/2014 6