Chandra Bhan Singh, V. Income Tax Officer, Basti

ITA 771/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 77123714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K RAM
• Assessee Lawyers: H RAHMAN
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Source of fund

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 771/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 CHANDRA BHAN SINGH NATH NAGAR SANTKABIRNAGAR V. INCOME - TAX OFFICER BASTI PAN: AVDPS4770K (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. H. RAHMAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. R. K. RAM, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 06.01.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10.01.2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: T HIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 . THE FACTS IN BRIEF BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD ARE THAT D URING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF AMOUNT FO R DEMAND DRAFTS PURCHASED ON DIFFERENT DATES , TOTALING TO ` 1.05 LAKHS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED EXPLANATION WITH REGARD TO THE SOURCE OF FUNDS, BUT IT W AS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ADDITION WAS MADE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PREFER ANY APPEAL AND ACCEPTED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THEREFORE, LEVIED PENALTY OF ` 50,000 THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNIS HED EXPLANATIONS DURING THE COURSE OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS . : - 2 - : 3 . AGAINST THE PENALTY ORDER THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH HIM. 4 . NOW THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT HE HAS FURNIS HED A VALID EXPLANATION WITH REGARD TO THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASE OF DEMAND DRAFTS TOTALING TO ` 1.05 LAKHS, BUT IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE PLAUSIBLE FOR THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE ADDITION , BUT ON ACCOUNT OF NON - ACCEPTANCE OF EXPLANATION THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT CANNOT BE MADE. 5 . THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6 . HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE HAS LEVIED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AFTER REJECTING THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF DEMAND DRAFT F OR ` 1.05 LAKHS. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE AMOUNT INVESTED IN PURCHAS ING THE DEMAND DRAFT IS NOT THAT MUCH , FOR WHICH THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE CAN OUT RIGHTLY BE IGNORED. HOWEVER, FOR NON - ACCEPTANCE OF THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE A SSESSEE, THE ADDITION CAN BE MADE BUT PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED. WE ACCORDINGLY FIND NO MERIT IN THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AND WE DELETE THE SAME. 7 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.1.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 10.1.2014 JJ: 0601 : - 3 - : COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR