Shri Jagdish Ratilal Sorathiya, GANDHIDHAM V. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITSSA 58/RJT/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8591 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 06-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AVINSAH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: J C RANPURA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBULAL; RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT. . . , . . , BEFORE SHRI T. K. SHARMA, JM AND SHRI B. R. JAIN AM IT (SS) NO. 58 /RJT/201 2 / ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5 - 06. JAGDISH RATILAL SORATHIA, PLOT NO.41, SECTOR - 2, GANDHIDHAM - KUTCH. PAN : A G NPS9810R ( / APPELLANT) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, RAJKOT. / R ESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY SHRI J. C. RANPURA , C. A. / REVENUE BY SHRI AVINSAH KUMAR, D . R. / DATE OF HEARING 14 - 12 - 20 12 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14 - 1 2 - 2012 / ORDER . . , / T. K. SHARMA, J. M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 0 1 - 0 6 - 201 2 OF CIT (A) - I V, AHMEDABAD C ONFIRM ING THE PENALTY OF RS. 3 4,884/ - OUT OF PENALTY OF RS.53,024/ - LEVIED BY AO U/S.2 2 1 OF THE I.T. ACT , 1961 FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 200 5 - 06. 2. BRIEFLY STATED , THE FACTS AR E THAT THE ASSESS MENT ORDER U/S153A(A) OF THE I.T . ACT WAS FRAMED RAISING A DEMAND OF RS.15,98,580/ - . THIS DEMAND WAS REDUCED TO RS.5,30,247/ - AFTER GIVING APPEAL EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). RED UCED DEMAND CONSISTS OF RS.3,48,847/ - TOWARDS TAX AND BALANCE OF RS.1,81,400/ - TOWARDS INTEREST U/S.234A & 234B OF THE I.T. ACT. AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH IS STILL PENDING FOR DISPOSAL. ITA 5 8 /RJT/2012 2 3. DURI NG THE PENDENCY OF APPEAL, AO ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE U/S.221(1) OF THE I.T. ACT DATED 04 - 03 - 2010. IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 16 - 03 - 2010 BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF AO THAT DUE TO SUDDEN DEMISE IN THE FAMILY, HE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE T HE AO AND ASKED FURTHER TIME TO MAKE WRITTEN SUBMISSION. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE DID NOT HEAR ANYTHING FROM AO AND SUDDENLY ON 02 - 06 - 2010, ASSESSEE RECEIVED AN ORDER U/S.221 OF THE I.T. ACT IMPOSING THE PENALTY 10% ON THE AMOUNT DUE FROM ASSESSEE. 4. AGAIN ST THE AFORESAID ORDER U/S.221 OF THE I.T. ACT, ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, REDUCED THE PENALTY U/S.221 TO RS. 34,884/ - . AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE, SHRI J. C. RANPURA, C.A. APPEARED AND POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT PAYING THE TAX DISPUTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT STILL THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT PAYING THE DISPUTED TAX. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE LEVYING THE PENALTY U/S.221(1), THE AO OUGHT TO HAVE GRANTED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THIS WAS NOT GIVEN, PENALTY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.34,884/ - CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER BE CANCELLED. ITA 5 8 /RJT/2012 3 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI AVINASH KUMAR, D.R. APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 7. HAVING H EARD BOTH SIDES, WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. THE SECOND PROVISIO OF SEC.22 1(1) PROVIDES AS UNDER: - PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE PROVES TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE [ASSESSING] OFFICER THAT THE DEFAULT WA S FOR GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASONS, NO PENALTY SHALL BE LEVIED UNDER THIS SECTION. 9. ADMITTEDLY IN THIS CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THIS CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THERE IS A GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASON FOR NOT PAYING TH E TAX. KEEPING IN MIND THIS FACT, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE TO LEVY THE PENALTY U/S 221(1) OF THE I.T. ACT. WE THEREFORE, CANCEL THE PENALTY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.34,884/ - CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 10. IN THE RESU LT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. SD/ - SD/ - ( B. R. JAIN ) ( . . / T. K. SHARMA) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ORDER DATE 14 - 12 - 2012. /RAJKOT / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. / APPELLANT - . JAGDISH RATILAL SORATHIA, GANDHIDHAM - KUTCH. ITA 5 8 /RJT/2012 4 2. / RESPONDENT - DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, RAJKOT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT - (CENTRAL) - I I , AHMEDABAD. . 4. - / CIT (A) - I V, AHMEDABAD. 5 . , , / DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER , TRUE COPY. A S STT. REGISTRAR , INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT. 1.DATE OF DICTATIO N : 14 - 12 - 2012. 2.DATE OF PLACING THE DRAFT. : 14 - 12 - 2012. 3.DATE OF APPROVAL OF DRAFT. : 4.DATE OF RETURN FROM JM : 5.DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 6.DATE OF SENDING TO BENCH CLERK : 7.DATE OF RECEIPT BY BENCH CLERK : 8.DATE OF PLACING IT FOR ENDO RSEMENT : 9.DATE OF ENDORSEMENT : 10.DATE OF DISPATCH :