Shri.Brijesh Kumar, Chandigarh V. The Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh

ITA 701/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5132 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES(SMC), CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 701/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SHRI BRIJESH KUMAR VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 235, SECTOR 18-A, WARD 2(3) CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AQYPK6688C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K. MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 31/05/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01/06/2017 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-2, AMRITSAR CAMP AT CHANDIGARH DT. 02/02/201 7 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12, CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 2 71(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AO NO TED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN INTEREST FROM SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WHILE FILIN G THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ADDITION OF RS. 18,841/- WAS MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO NOTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UN DER SECTION 271(1)(C) ON ACCOUNT OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AS WELL AS FURNISH ING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME HAVE BEEN INITIATED SEPARATEL Y. BY THE SEPARATE ORDER PENALTY WAS LEVIED ON THIS ADDITION WHICH WAS CONFI RMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 3. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTION, I AM OF THE VIEW PENALTY IS NOT LEVIABLE IN THE MATTER. 4. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED COPY OF THE P ENALTY NOTICE DT. 30/12/2013, IN WHICH THE AO HAS NOTED WHEREAS IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT 2 PROCEEDINGS BEFORE ME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU HAVE CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF YOUR INCOME / FUR NISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF YOUR INCOME. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS 73 TAXMANN.COM 241 IN WHICH THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WA S DISMISSED CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN WHICH THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HOLDING NOTICE ISSUED BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 274 R.W.S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT TO BE BAD IN LAW AS IT DID NOT S PECIFY WHICH LIMB OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS HAD B EEN INITIATED, I.E., WHETHER THE CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISH ING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE JUDGMENT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IS CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT BY DISMISSING THE SLP IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS 73 TAXMANN.COM 248. 5. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS, IT IS CLEAR THAT TH E AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS IN THE PENALTY NOTICE DID NOT SPEC IFY FOR WHICH LIMB OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, THE PENALTY HAD BEEN INITIATE D I.E., WHETHER FOR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE PENALTY IS NOT LEVIABLE IN THE MATTER. THE ISSUE IS THEREFORE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY JUDGMENT IN THE CASE O F CIT VS. SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS (SUPRA). I ACCORDINGLY SET ASDIE THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CANCEL THE PENALTY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 01/06/2017 AG COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT, THE CIT(A), THE DR