PRAVIN VRAJLAL SHAH, THANE V. ITO WD 4(2), MUMBAI

ITA 686/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92312 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 02-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PREMANAND J
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

1 , INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - C BENCH , , BEFORE S/SH. I P BANSAL,JUDICIAL MEMBE R & RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /. ITA NO. /686 /MUM/20 13 , / ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2005 - 06 PRAVIN VRAJLAL SHAH KISHORKUNJ BUILDING NO.4 C WING BLOCK 1,NEAR VIVA COLLEGE, VIRAR THANE PAN: AADPS8398A VS ITO HQ(CIB)PUNE ( / ASSESSEE ) ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : NONE / REVENUE BY :SHRI PREMANAND J. / DATE OF HEARING : 30 - 04 - 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 - 04 - 2015 , 1961 254 ( 1 ) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA, AM - CHALLENGING THE ORDER DT. 31/10/2012 OF THE CIT(A) - II , THANE , T HE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1.ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LEVYING PE NALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) AT RS.6,29,554/ - 2.THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE QUANTUM APPEAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 18' FEBRUARY, 2011. 3.THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO AMEND, ALTER OR VARY THE GROUNDS OF APP EAR EITHER BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL . BRIEF FACTS : ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE TRANSACTIONS REPORTED IN A NNUAL I NFORMATION R ETURN THE AS SESSEE HAD MADE DEPOSIT IN CASH, IN A SAVING BANK ACCOUNT , A GGREGATING TO RS.19.57 LACS DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. O N THE BASIS OF SAID INFORMATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER( AO )ISSUED A NOTICE U/S. 142(2) OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE CALLING FOR RETURN OF INCOME .AS PER THE AO, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE HIS RETURN OF INC OME OR THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. HE COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 144 OF THE ACT ON 26/12/2007 , TREATING THE CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED, AMOUNTING TO RS.19.57 LACS . THE AO ALSO INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDING U/S . 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR CONCEA LING THE PARTICULARS OF THE INCOME. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDING FIRST A PPELLATE AUTHORITY( FAA ) DISMISSED THE APPEAL .IN THE MEANWHILE, THE AO LEVIED PENALTY OF RS.6 .29 LACS, VIDE HIS ORDER DT.30.3.2009 U/S. 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT , FOR CONCEALING THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME .THE FAA CONFIRMED THE PENALTY ORDER AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFOR E HIM. 2 2 . BEFORE US,AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) STATED THAT THET RIBUNAL, VIDE ITS ORDER DT.18. 0 2.2011 HAD SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE FAA , THAT THE PENALTY CONFIRMED BY THE F AA SHOULD BE DELET ED. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) LEFT THE ISSUE TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BENCH. 4 . AFTER CO NSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT PENALTY WOULD NOT SURVIVE AS THE QUANTUM ORDER HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE T RIBUNAL.EFF ECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. AS A RESULT,APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED . . ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH ,APRIL,2015. 30 , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( /I P BANSAL) ( / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, /DATE:30 .04.2015 JV / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5 . DR C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , / ITAT, MUMBAI.