LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR, BHARATPUR V. ITO, BHARATPUR

ITA 775/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5513 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DR DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: K L MOOLCHANDAN I
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 775/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR NEAR CITY AUSHODHALYA JAMA MASJID, BHARATPUR CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 2 BHARATPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AAAFL 5640 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.L. MOOLCHANDANI, ADV. JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA , JCIT- DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 21/01/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/01/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR, DATED 07-09-2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WHEREIN THE SOLITARY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY ERRED IN IMPOSING AND CONFIRMING PENALTY OF RS. 39,549/- U/S 271(1) ( C) OF THE ACT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF T HE CASE IN ITS RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. THUS, THE PENALTY SO LEVIED DESE RVES TO BE DELETED. ITA NO. 775/JP/2015 M/S.LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR VS. ITO, WARD- 2, BHARATPUR . 2 2.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR CONTEN DS THAT THE PENALTY IN QUESTION HAS BEEN LEVIED IN THE HANDS OF THE FIR M IN RESPECT OF FDR/ KVP WHICH WERE STANDING IN THE NAMES OF FAMILY MEMB ERS OF THE PARTNERS AS UNDER:- (I) RS. 95,140/- IN THE NAME OF SMT.CHANDRA DEVI (II) RS. 50,000/- IN THE NAME OF BEENA HASWANI D/O SHRI SUNDER LAL, PARTNER OF M/S. LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR, BH ARATPUR THESE AMOUNTS WERE SHOWN BY SMT. CHANDRA DEVI AND S UNDER LAL IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURNS. HOWEVER, THEY BEING LADIE S AVOIDED THE INCOME- TAX PROCEEDINGS AND ASSESSEE FIRM DECLARED THESE AM OUNTS AS ITS INCOME. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECISION O F HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCT S P. LTD., 322 ITR 158 AS THE ABOVE AMOUNTS WERE DECLARED IN THE RETUR NS OF SMT.CHANDRA DEVI AND SHRI SUNDER LAL. THE LD. AR CONTENDS THAT THE RELEVANT PARTICULARS WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT AN D MERELY BECAUSE THEY ARE OWNED BY THE FIRM IT CANNOT LEAD TO IMPOSI TION OF IMPUGNED PENALTY AUTOMATICALLY. SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE IN ASSES SEE CASE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ALSO AND THE PENALTY WAS DELETED BY TH E LD. CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 12-09-2012 BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATION: ITA NO. 775/JP/2015 M/S.LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR VS. ITO, WARD- 2, BHARATPUR . 3 AS REGARDS ADDITION OF RS. 38,230/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN FDR IN THE NAME OF SMT. C HANDRA BAI, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS DECLAR ED AS THE RESULT OF SURVEY IN THE RETURN OF SMT. CHANDRA BAI FOR THE A.Y. 2006-07 AND SUBSEQUENTLY IT WAS ASSESSED IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS. I FIND T HAT HIS ADDITION IS BASED ON DIFFERENT OF OPINION AND THE A PPELLANTS EXPLANATION IN THIS REGARD IS FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABL E. ACCORDINGLY PENALTY LEVIED ON THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 38 ,230/- IS DELETED. 2.2 THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES. 2.3 I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED THAT THE FDR /KVP WERE DECLARED BY SMT.CHANDRA DEVI AND SHRI SUNDER LAL IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURNS WHICH WERE DULY FILED. THUS THE RELEVANT PA RTICULARS IN THIS BEHALF WERE BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT. IN ORDER TO AVOID INCOM E TAX PROCEEDINGS ON LADIES, THE ASSESSEE FIRM AGREED FOR INCLUSION THER EOF IN ITS NAMES. BESIDES, THE LD. CIT(A) ON SIMILAR FACTS IN ASSESSE E'S CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 HAD DELETED THE PENALTY BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V S. RELIANCE PETRO PRODUCTS P. LTD., (SUPRA). THUS IN VIEW OF THE ABOV E FOREGOING, THE PENALTY CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS DELETED. HEN CE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ITA NO. 775/JP/2015 M/S.LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR VS. ITO, WARD- 2, BHARATPUR . 4 3.0 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 /01/20 16. SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27 /01/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. LAXMI SAREE BHANDAR, BHARATPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- 2, BHARATPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 775/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR