K. Krishnamurthy, Bangalore V. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 667/BANG/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3772 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 23-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATHIK
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH B, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI S.K.YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.667 (BANG) 2015 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2011 12) SHRI K. KRISHNAMURTHY, CHOWDESHWARI PRASANNA NO. 94, 1 ST MAIN, 2 ND CROSS, PRASHANTH EXTENSION, HOPE FAR, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE 560066 PAN: AVXPK5376K APPELLANT VS DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1), BANGALORE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRATHIK, C. A. REVENUE BY : SHRI AR. V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 23-08-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17-10-2016 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A. M.: THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) 4 BANGALORE DATED 04.03.2015 FOR A. Y. 2011 12. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 6 GROUNDS BUT THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ABOUT PENALTY U/S 271AAA. 3. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT RELIAN CE WAS PLACED BY THE ASSESSEE ON A TRIBUNAL ORDER RENDERED IN THE CASE O F DCIT VS. PIONEER MARBLES & INTERIORS LTD. AS REPORTED IN 19 TAXMAN.C OM 301 (KOL.) AND CONTENTS OF THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER ARE REPRODUCED BY T HE CIT (A) ON PAGES 13 TO 15 OF HIS ORDER. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON THIS TRIBUNA L ORDER. LEARNED DR OF THE IT (TP) A NO.92/B/2015 2 REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IT IS NOTED BY CIT (A) IN PARA 6 OF HIS ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE THE PAYMENT OF TAX AND INTEREST EVEN AFTER PEN ALTY NOTICE WAS ISSUED AND FURTHER TIME WAS ALLOWED FOR PAYMENT OF TAX. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIN D THAT THIS IS NOTED BY THE A. O. IN THE PENALTY ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A LETTER DATED 10.09.1013 REQUESTING FOR TIME TO MAKE PAYMENT OF T AXES AND TIME WAS GRANTED TILL 30.09.2013 BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PA Y TAXES AND UNDER THESE FACTS, HE IMPOSED PENALTY U/S 271AAA. AS PER THE TR IBUNAL ORDER CITED BEFORE CIT (A) AND ALSO BEFORE US, THE ASSESSSEE IN THAT C ASE, THE ASSESSEE MADE PAYMENT OF TAX AND INTEREST IN FULL ON GETTING THE DEMAND NOTICE IN THAT CASE U/S 156 AND UNDER THESE FACTS, THE TRIBUNAL HELD TH AT SINCE NO TIME LIMIT IS PRESCRIBED FOR PAYMENT OF TAX AND INTEREST, THE PAY MENT OF TAX AND INTEREST ON RAISING THE DEMAND U/S 156 IS GOOD COMPLIANCE OF THIS PAYMENT REQUIREMENT AND THE A.O. CANNOT INSIST THAT SUCH PA YMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BEFORE FILING OF RETURN BUT IN THE PRESEN T CASE, PAYMENT OF TAX AND INTEREST HAS NOT BEEN MADE TILL NOW BECAUSE NO SUCH EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE US OR BEF ORE LOWER AUTHORITIES. HENCE IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THIS TRIBUN AL ORDER IS NOT APPLICABLE. MOREOVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS OF SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA A BOUT PAYMENT OF TAXES AND INTEREST AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ELI GIBLE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THIS SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271AAA. HENCE, WE DECLIN E TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A). IT (TP) A NO.92/B/2015 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MEN TIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) JUDICAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: BANGALORE: D A T E D : 17.10.2016 AM /AKG/ DS / COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A) - II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE