SATISH KUMAR AGRAWAL, BHILAI,DURG V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), BHILAI, DURG

ITA 542/RPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Satish Kumar Agrawal, who appealed against the penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer under Section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for failing to get his accounts audited as required under Section 44AB of the Act. The penalty of Rs. 1,50,000 was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. Agrawal's appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur, was dismissed as he opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472220 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TARANNUM VERMA
• Section: 44AB; 271B

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर Ɋायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR ŵी रिवश सूद, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अŜण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 542/RPR/2024 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Satish Kumar Agrawal, 38/10, Nehru Nagar West, Bhilai, District: Durg-490029 C.G. V s Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Aaykar Bhawan, Civic Center, Bhilai, 490006, C.G. (Through NFAC) PAN: AFLPA2025F (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) . . (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) िनधाŊįरती की ओर से /Assessee by : None राजˢ की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 21.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 18.10.2024, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. under Sec. 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 19.08.2021 for the assessment year 2018- 19. 2 ITA No: 542/RPR/2024 Satish Kumar Agrawal vs ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai, Durg 2. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the order imposing penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- under section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The impugned order is bad in law and on facts. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter, omit all or any of the grounds of appeal with the permissions of the Hon’ble appellate authority. 3. Brief facts in this case are that the assessee is an individual, who derives income from rent, commission and interest. Return of Income for the year under consideration was filed on 30.08.2018 declaring total income at Rs. 6,41,720/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny on the reason “Cash deposit”. The issue regarding assessee’s involvement in fund activities through various retailers working at different places in different district of CG, was discussed and deliberated by the Ld. AO and had concluded that the assessee has earned 2% commission on the total transfer of Rs.13,60,15,845/- which comes to Rs.27,20,316/-, whereas the assessee had shown a commission income of Rs. 8,44,480/- in his ITR, therefore, the remaining amount of Rs.18,75,836/- was added to the income of assessee and the assessed income has been enhanced to 3 ITA No: 542/RPR/2024 Satish Kumar Agrawal vs ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai, Durg Rs.25,17,556/-. Ld. AO a recorded his satisfaction to initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271B of the I T Act, as the assessee was under obligation within the meaning of Section 44AB of the Act to get his accounts audited. However, as the assessee failed to get his accounts audited for the relevant year, therefore, the A.O. initiated penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- u/s. 271B of the Act vide order dated 19.08.2021. 4. Aggrieved with the aforesaid penalty order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the appeal of assessee has been dismissed by the first appellate authority, vide order dated 18.10.2024. 5. Aggrieved with the aforesaid order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee instituted an appeal before us, the same is under consideration in intent case. 6. In this case, at the threshold of the hearing, it is noticed that the assessee through the Counsel CA, Yogesh Sethia, by filing a letter of adjournment dated 21.01.2025, had submitted that is proposing to opt for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (VSVS 2024), in order to settle the dispute involved in the captioned appeal. Although, the assessee had requested for adjournment on account of his willingness to opt for VSVS- 4 ITA No: 542/RPR/2024 Satish Kumar Agrawal vs ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai, Durg 2024, but we are not inclined to allow for the same. Rather, we find it appropriate to dismiss the appeal of the assessee, treating the same as withdrawn, as the assessee wish to go for declaration under VSVS-2024, thus, there is no need to keep the matter pending for adjudication on merits. 7. Per contra, Smt. Tarannum Verma, Senior Departmental Representatives (for short “Ld. Sr. DR”) did not raise any objection, if the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 8. Considering the aforesaid factual position, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. Before parting, we may herein observe that in case the order for full and final settlement of tax arrears in “Form 4” is not passed by the designated authority, then the assessee will remain at a liberty to seek restoration of the subject appeal. 9. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the aforesaid observations. 5 ITA No: 542/RPR/2024 Satish Kumar Agrawal vs ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai, Durg Order pronounced in the open court on 22/01/2025. Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर/Raipur; िदनांक Dated 22/01/2025 Vaibhav Shrivastav आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, (Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ITAT, Raipur 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant- Satish Kumar Agrawal 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent- ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai, Durg 3. The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. // स᭜यािपत ᮧित True copy // "