Krishan Kumar Goel, Ghaziabad V. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 6323/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8298 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VASUNDHARA UPMANYU
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 132; 143(3); 142(1); 153A

Judgement Text

Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 6323/Del2017. (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Krishan Kumar Goel, 18, Rama Krishna Colony, GT Road, Model Town, Ghaziabad PAN: AEGPG4936H Vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by: Smt Vasundhara Upmanyu, CIT DR Date of Hearing 20/10/2021 Date of pronouncement 17/11/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee/ Shri Krishan Kumar Goel against the order of the d CIT(A)-IV, Kanpur dated 14.08.2017 for Assessment Year 2012-13 wherein, penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act by the ld DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad as per order dated 15.12.2016 penalty levied of Rs. 10,000/- is confirmed. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. The impugned order dated 15.12.2016 passed by the ld Assessing Officer, DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad imposing penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and facts. 2. The impugned order passed by the ld AO was in absence of recording of the satisfaction in the assessment order, mere intimation of penalty will not confer jurisdiction on the AO to levy the penalty. 3. The impugned order passed by the ld AO was passed ignoring the fact that the non compliance was un-intentional, genuine cause looking to number of assessment cases compliances and subsequently in short period properly complied.” 3. Briefly stated the fact shows that the assessee is an individual who was issued notice u/s 153A of the Act on 18.08.2016. Further, notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 07.10.2016 fixing the date of hearing on 09.11.2016, on that date the assessee failed to submit the explanation and therefore, a show cause notice was issued u/s 271(1)(b) was issued on 05.12.2016. The above notice was also not complied with and therefore, the ld AO passed an order on Page | 2 15.12.2016 u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act holding that the assessee has willfully not complied with the above notice and the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was levied. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld CIT(A) who confirmed the penalty. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Despite notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore, the issue is decided n the merits of the case as per information available on record. 5. The ld DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 6. The fact as noted from the orders of the lower authorities it is noted that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 26.09.2014 on the assessee comprising KDP/ MGI Group of cases. Notice u/s 153A was issued on 18.08.2016 and the assessee filed return of income on 06.09.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 11,10,060/-. The assessment order was passed on 30.12.2016 u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act wherein the addition of Rs. 50 lakhs was made and the total income was determined at Rs. 61,10,060/-. During assessment proceedings assessee submitted the complete details and his arguments before the ld AO. The assessee has also made his statement before AO on 10.12.2014 and he also cross examined the witness , thereafter the assessment order was framed. 7. Fact also shows that as on the appointed date the assessee was contesting the assessment of 14 different entities of the same group for 7 different years i.e. 98 cases. It is further the fact that the assessee through his counsel regularly appeared before the ld AO in one or another cases. It is also stated that erstwhile counsel associated with the company left the assessee in the first week of December 2016. Even otherwise the continuous appearance of the assessee before the ld AO in his own case this year also shows that none compliance was not intentional. The fact also shows that the assessee has shown sufficient reason for none compliance on that date. In view of this, we do not find any reason to uphold the penalty levied. Accordingly, we reverse the orders of the lower authorities and direct the ld AO to delete the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. 8. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17/11/2021. - -- Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) Sd/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 17/11/2021 A K Keot Copy forwarded to Page | 3 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Page | 4 Date of dictation 17.11.2021 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating member 17.11.2021 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the other member 17.11.2021 Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/ PS 17.11.2021 Date on which the fair order is placed before the dictating member for pronouncement 17.11.2021 Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/ PS 17.11.2021 Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT 17.11.2021 date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 17.11.2021 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the order