Smt. Sukhwant Kaur, Mandi V. ITO, Mandi

ITA 983/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3790 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES SMC CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 983/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SMT. SUKHWANT KAUR, VS. THE ITO, MANDI MANDI, HIMACHAL PRADESH H.P. ALWPK8033G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.K. MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 17/10/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/10/2016 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PALAMPUR DATED 27.7.2016. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE THROUGH RAPD. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I DISPOSE OF THIS CASE EX. PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 3. I HAVE HEARD LD. DR SHRI S.K. MITTAL. IN THIS CA SE, PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS LEVIED IN RESPECT OF (A) FURNISHING OF INAC CURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME BEING INTEREST FROM BANK DEPOSITS AND (B) FURNISHING OF I NACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME BEING CAPITAL GAINS ON SALE O F HOTEL NAMELY PRATAP PALACE. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE DISCREPANCY IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY HER IN THE FOLLOWING WORDS:- 2 'IN FACT THE INCOME WAS TAKEN LESSER BY RS. 1 LAKH BECAUSE OF THE TDS CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN WHICH THE FIGURE T YPED WAS RS, 160131/- INSTEAD OF RS. 230131/-. THEREFORE, T HE INCOME WAS DECLARED AS PER THE WRONG CERTIFICATE OR AT THE MOST MISLEADING CERTIFICATE AS EVIDENT FROM THE PLA IN READING OF THE FIGURE IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE ON THE FILE, IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE FACT THAT EVEN DURING PROCESSING T HE FIGURE OF INTEREST RS. 160131/- AND REFUND WAS ISSUED TO T HE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE THERE IS NO ELEMENT OF CONCEALM ENT AT ALL. SECONDLY WHEN THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE HOTEL P RATAP PALACE WERE RECEIVED THE ASSESSEE WENT TO THE BANK WHERE THE MANAGER ADVISED HER THAT IF SHE INVESTED THE A MOUNT IN THE FIXED DEPOSITS NO CAPITAL GAINS TAX WOULD BE LE VIED. RELYING ON HIM SHE NEITHER SHOWED THE INCOME FROM C APITAL GAINS NOR THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE SPECIFIED BON DS U/S 54EC. SHE REMAINED UNDER A BONA-FIDE BELIEF THAT SH E HAD DONE THE NEEDFUL BY INVESTING THE SALES PROCEEDS OF THE HOTEL IN THE FIXED DEPOSITS IN THE BANK. THE INCOME FROM BANK INTEREST WAS SHOWN IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN FI LED FOR THE RELEVANT YEARS. THE FACTS STATED IN THE FOREGOI NG PARAGRAPHS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT IT IS A BONA-FIDE MISTAKE AND NO ELEMENT OF CONCEALMENT IS THERE. 4. ON A PERUSAL OF THIS EXPLANATION, I AM OF THE VI EW THAT AS FAR AS ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST INCOME IS CONCERNED, THE FIGURE RECORDED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS AN INADVERTENT MISTAKE, WHICH WAS COMMITTED DUE A MISTAKE DONE BY THE BANK WHILE ISSUING A TDS CERTIFICATE. THE BANK IN THE TD S CERTIFICATE WRONGLY TYPED THE FIGURE AS RS. 1,60,131/- INSTEAD OF CORRECT FIGURE OF RS. 2,30,131/-. THUS, ON THIS ISSUE, I AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT MISTAKE WAS INADVERTENT. THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE IS BONA FIDE. HENCE, THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON THIS ADDITION O F RS. 1,00,000/- IS HEREBY DELETED. 5. COMING TO THE ADDITION REGARDING NON-DISCLOSURE OF CAPITAL GAINS ARISING OUT OF SALE OF HOTEL PRATAP PALACE, I AM NOT CONVINCED WIT H THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS INCOME WAS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE RETU RN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE EXEMPTION U/S 54EC HAS TO BE CLAIMED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. NO DETAILS WERE 3 FURNISHED BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PENALTY LEVIED ON THIS ADDITION IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. THIS APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN PART. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED PARTLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.10.2016 SD/- [J. SUDHAKAR REDDY] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 17 TH OCTOBER, 2016 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR