Sh. Gajinder singh, Amritsar. V. The Income Tax Office, Amritsar.

SA 7/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3265 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 15-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHAWANI SHANKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Keywords: Application of stay
• Section: 271(1)(c); 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO.261(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 STAY APPLICATION NO.07(ASR)2016 ARISING OUT OF I TA NO.261(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR:2002-03 SH. GAJINDER SINGH S/O SH. GURBACHAN SINGH 248-A, AJIT NAGAR, SULTANWIND ROAD, AMRITSAR. PAN:ABSPS9049L. VS. ITO, WARD 3(1), AMRITSAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. P. N. ARORA (ADV.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. BHAWANI SHANKAR (DR.) DATE OF HEARING: 15.06.2016 DATE OF PRONO UNCEMENT:03.08.2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LEARNED CIT(A), AMRITSAR, DATED 30.03.2016 FOR ASST. YEAR: 2002-03. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS THE ACTION OF LEARNED CIT(A), BY WHICH HE HAD CONFIRMED A PENALTY IMPOSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS NOTED IN THE PENA LTY ORDER ARE THAT THE REVENUE HAD INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD M ADE INVESTMENT OF ITA NO.261 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEA R: 2002-03 2 RS.14,81,250/- FOR PURCHASE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY A ND THEREFORE, THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED U/S 148 OF ACT. DURIN G THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE DID NOT COOPERATE IN THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 OF ACT, AND ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATED AND IMPOSED PENALTY FOR CONCEALME NT OF INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.14,81,250/-. 5. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER THE ASSESSEE FILED APPE AL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A), WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AR INVITED OUR ATTENT ION TO THE APPELLATE ORDER IN RESPECT OF QUANTUM IN APPEAL NO.05/2014-15 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) ON 12.05.2016 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO RS.1,23,588/- ONLY AND T HEREFORE, THE PENALTY IF ANY SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED TO THE CONCEALMENT OF INCOME TO THIS EXTENT ONLY. 8. WITHOUT PREJUDICE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS BEEN FILING RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS AND IN THIS RESPECT, HE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO (PB PAGE 35 TO 36) WHERE C OPIES OF RETURNS OF ASSESSEE FOR ASST. YEARS: 2000-01 & 2001-02 WAS PLA CED. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HA S BEEN FILING RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS, THE ADDITION OF THIS AMOUNT WAS ALSO NOT WARRANTED AND ATLEAST PENALTY WAS NOT IMPOSABLE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ITA NO.261 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEA R: 2002-03 3 LEARNED CIT(A) WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CAS E HAD SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN THIS RE SPECT INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO FINDINGS OF LEARNED CIT(A). 9. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON T HE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A). 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED AR AND HAVE GONE THRO UGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 12.05.2016 IN APPEAL NO.05/2014-15 HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO RS. 1,23,588/- ONLY AND THEREFORE, PENA LTY IF ANY SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED ON THE CONCEALMENT OF THIS AMOUNT O NLY. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS DISMISS ED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE BY NOT RECORDING ANY FINDINGS AND HE DISMI SSED THE APPEAL BY MENTIONING THAT GROUND OF APPEAL AT SERIAL NO.1 TO 8 ARE DISMISSED. THE DISMISSAL OF APPEAL WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASONS IS N OT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF LAW. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD IGNORED T HE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FILING RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS. THE ASSESSEE VIDE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 31.12.2015 HAD INTIMATED TO LEARNED CIT(A) ABOUT THESE FACTS BUT LEARNED CIT(A) WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN ARGUMENTS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSES SEE WHICH IS NOT JUSTIFIED. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN EXISTING ASSESSEE AND DURING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS SEPARATE FINDINGS SHOULD HAVE B EEN MADE REGARDING CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. THOUGH, THE LEARNED CIT(A) C ONFIRMED PART ITA NO.261 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEA R: 2002-03 4 ADDITION IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS YET IN PENALTY PROC EEDINGS, THE AUTHORITIES HAS TO MAKE SEPARATE FINDINGS REGARDING CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FURNISHING OF WRONG PARTICULARS OF INCOME , WHICH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAS NOT DONE. THE LEARNED AR HAS FILED COPIES OF RETURNS OF ASSESSEE FOR ASST. YEARS: 2000-01 AND 20 01-02 IN SUPPORT OF HIS ARGUMENTS THAT ASSESSEE IS AN EXISTING ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, NO PENALTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSED KEEPING IN VIEW TH ESE FACTS. WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE ARGUMENT OF THE LEARNED AR, THER EFORE, WE DELETE THE PENALTY CONFIRMED BY LEARNED CIT(A). 11. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 12. SINCE, WE HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL IN FAVOR OF THE ASSESSEE, THE STAY APPLICATION FIELD BY ASSESSEE HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOU S, THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03. 08.2016. SD/- S D/- (A.D. JAIN) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCO UNTANT MEMBER DATED: 03.08.2016. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER ITA NO.261 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEA R: 2002-03 5