KEYSTONE INC., MUMBAI V. A.C.I.T. CEN. CIR. 13, MUMBAI

ITA 7363/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92698 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PREMANAND J
• Assessee Lawyers: DR K SHIVRAM MS NEELAM JADHAV
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Loose papers
• Section: 132

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO . 7363/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 - 08 M/S. KEYSTONE INC. (PROP SJHRI PATARAM DEWASI), 01, HEERABAI TRUST BLDG., C.P. TANK ROAD, MUMBAI / VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 13, MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AEKPD 9705P ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: DR. K. SHIVRAM MS. NEELAM JADHAV / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PREMANAND J. / DATE OF HEARING : 0 2 . 0 6 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 2 .0 6 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: WITH T HIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 37 , MUMBAI DT. 31.5.2012 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 0 8 . 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. ITA. NO. `7363/M/2012 2 3. THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 140 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED LETTER FOR THE CONDONATION OF THE DELAY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT. 4. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND THE REASONS FOR T HE DELAY. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL ON TIME. THE DELAY IS CONDONED. 5. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S. 132 OF THE ACT WERE CONDUCT ED ON PRAKASH STEELAGE GROUP ON 9.2.2009. THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF ITS GROUP CONCERN. DU R ING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, CERTAIN LOOSE PAPERS WERE FOUND. WHILE SCRUTINIZING THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED INTER EST OF RS. 60,493/ - WHICH WAS NOT OFFERED TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES , T HE SAME WAS ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 271(1)(C) HAVE BEEN INITIATED. THE AO LEVIED THE PENALTY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS COMMITTED DEFAULT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. 7. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E REITERATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 8. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 9. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT CE RTAIN INCRIMINATING LOOSE PAPER WAS FOUND DURING ITA. NO. `7363/M/2012 3 THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH. IT IS ALSO AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT INTEREST OF RS. 60,493/ - WAS NOT SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT BY NOT DOING SO THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. WE, THEREFORE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 2 ND JUNE , 2015 . SD/ - SD/ - ( JOGINDER SING H ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 2 ND JUNE , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI