Uttam Modi, Kolkata V. ITO,Ward-54(3), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 888/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8105 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-06-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L K S DEHIYA
• Keywords: Bonafide belief; Non compliance
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH C , KOLKATA [ () . .. . . .. . , ,, , , ! ''# $% ''# $% ''# $% ''# $% ] ]] ] [BEFORE HONBLE SRI C.D.RAO, AM & HONBLE SRI GE ORGE MATHAN, JM] !' !' !' !' /ITA NO.888/KOL/2012 (%) *+/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ($- / APPELLANT ) - % - ( /0$- /RESPONDENT) UTTAM MODI I.T.O., WARD-54(3), KOLKATA -VERSUS- KOLKATA (PAN:AERPM 8453 J) $- 1 2 / FOR THE APPELLANT: NONE /0$- 1 2 / FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI L.K.S.DEHIYA, CIT(DR) 3%4 1 /DATE OF HEARING : 16.10.2012. 5* 1 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.10.2012. 6 / ORDER . .. . . .. . , PER SHRI C.D.RAO, AM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) XXXVI, KOLKATA DATED 12.04.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 -07. 2. NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WE CONSIDER IT TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS RELATI NG TO CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE I.T.ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.20,000/-. 4. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR WHO RELIED ON ORDERS O F THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 1 43(3) OF THE IT ACT ON 30 TH DECEMBER, 2008 BY STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE THOUGH NOT APPEARED IN THE EARLIER DATES OF HEARING I.E. 15.07.2008 AND 18.09.2008 THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY APPEARED ON 17.11.2008 AND 24.11.2008 AND BASED ON HIS COOPERAT ION THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER FOR NON A PPEARANCE OF ASSESSEE ON 15.07.2008 AND 18.09.2008 SINCE ASSESSEE DID NOT FI LE ANY EXPLANATION NOR FURNISHED 2 ANY REASON FOR HIS NON COMPLIANCE HE LEVIED PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- PER DAY OF NON COMPLIANCE. 4.1. ON APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ACT ION OF AO BUT THE EXPLANATION OF ASSESSEE IS THAT ON BOTH THE DAYS THE ASSESSEE C OULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE AO AND THE SAME WAS ALSO INFORMED TO AO THROUGH STAFF OF THE A R. THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE FILED ALONG WITH TH E MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER :- ON 15 TH JULY, 2008 THE A/R COULD NOT ATTEND THE CHAMBER DU E TO ILLNESS OF HIS WIFE AND THERE WAS NOBODY IN THE FAMILY OF A/R TO LOOK AFTER THE WIFE AND CHILDREN. ON 18.09.2008 THE A/R WAS OUT OF STATION DUE TO DEATH OF FATHER IN LAW AT BANGALORE ON 31 ST AUGUST,. 2008 AND RETURNED BACK ON 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2008 FORM BANGALORE. THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE BEYOND THE A/RS CONTROL AS BECA USE TOTAL DOCUMENTS AND DETAILS ARE LYING WITH THE A/R. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES MY A/R WAS UNABLE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. AO ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED DATE. 4.2. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE EXPLANATION WE FI ND THAT IT IS A BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING SUFFICIENT REASON FOR N ON APPEARANCE ON THE SAID DATES AND FURTHER KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION OF SECTION 273 OF THE ACT SINCE THE REASONS NARRATED BY THE ASSESSEE APPEARS BONA FIDE WE ARE O F THE VIEW THAT NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND DELETE THE PENALTY OF RS.20,000/-. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16.10.2012 SD/- SD/- [ .''# $% , ] [ .., ] [ GEORGE MATHAN ] [ C. D. RAO ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( (( ( ) )) ) DATE: 16.10.2012. R.G.(.P.S.) 3 6 1 /((7 87*9- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. UTTAM MODI, EE.122/2, SALT LAKE, SECTOR-2, KOLKATA- 700091. 2 THE I.T.O., WASRD-54(3), KOLKATA. 3. THE CIT- 4. THE CIT(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA 07 /(/ TRUE COPY, 6%3/ BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES