SHRI NIRMAL SINGH BHATIA, RAIPUR (CG) V. THE WEALTH TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1), RAIPUR (CG)

WTA 5/BIL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6501 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: TDS Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P K MISHRA

Judgement Text

WTA NOS. 05 TO 09 RPR 2016 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. , JUDICIAL MEMBER W.T.A. NO S .: - 05 TO 09 / RPR /201 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 08 - 09 TO 2012 - 13 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), RAIPUR (C.G.) VS SHRI NIRMAL SINGH BHATIA, S/O SHRI RANJEET SINGH BHATIA, B - 19, RAVI NAGAR, RAIPUR (C.G.) PAN ADLPB 7128 G (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) NONE APPELLANT BY SHRI P.K. MISHRA, CIT, DR RESPONDENT BY 03 / 05 /201 7 DATE OF HEARING 03 / 05 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER: GEORGE GEORGE K., J.M.: 1. THESE APPEAL S AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - I, RAIPUR DATED 29.06.2016. THE ORDER OF THE CIT( A) ARISE OUT OF ORDERS PASSED U /S 18(1)(C) OF THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 1957 (FOR SHORT THE ACT). THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2008 - 09 TO 2012 - 13. 2. SINCE COMMON ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSE OF BY THIS CONSOLI DATED ORDER. WTA NOS. 05 TO 09 RPR 2016 2 3. THE SOLITARY ISSUE THAT ARISES FOR OUR CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 18(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 4. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: FOR THE A . YS 2008 - 09 TO 2012 - 13, NO RETURN OF WEALTH WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 14 OF THE ACT. THE AO NOTICED THAT NET WEALTH CHARGEABLE TO TAX FOR A . YS 2008 - 09 TO 2012 - 13 EXCEED THE EXEMPTED LIMIT AND THEREFORE , AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS , ISSUED NOTICE U/S 17 OF THE WEALTH TAX ACT. ON RECEIPT OF THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 17 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF WEALTH FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS . THE W EALTH TAX ASSESSMENT W ERE COMPLETED U/S 16(3) R.W.S. 17 OF THE ACT FOR THE A . YS 2008 - 09 TO 2012 - 13. 5. SUBSEQ UENT TO THE WEALTH TAX ASSESSMENT FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDING AND THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR VARIOUS DATES. SINCE NONE APPEARED NOR ANY WRITTEN EXPLANATION WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD , T HE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED AN EX - PARTE PENALTY ORDER U/S 18(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR THE VARIOUS ASSESSMENT YEAR S IN APPEALS. THE PENALTY IMPOSED FOR THE A . Y S 2008 - 09 TO 2012 - 13 ARE DETAILED BELOW: ASSESSMENT YEARS (2008 - 09) (2009 - 10) (2010 - 11) (2011 - 12) (2012 - 13) PENALTY AMOUNT RS.1,39,000/ - RS.90,000/ - RS.1,02,000/ - RS.1,16,000/ - RS.1,26,000/ - WTA NOS. 05 TO 09 RPR 2016 3 6 . THE OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN IMPOSING THE PENALTY FOR THE AY 2008 - 09 READS AS FOLLOWS : 4 THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH HIS RETURN OF NET WEALTH VOLUNTARILY WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED UNDER WT ACT AND FILED HIS RETURN OF NET WEALTH ONLY AFTER ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 17(1) OF THE WT ACT AND FILED HIS RETURN OF NET WEALTH ONLY AFTER ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 17 (1) OF THE WT ACT. CONSIDERING THE FACTS I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DELIBERATELY COMMITTED THE DEFAULT OF CONCEALMENT OF NET WEALTH OF FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF NET WEALTH AND IS LIABLE FOR PENALTY U/S 18(1)(C). 7 . AGGRIEVED BY THE P ENALTY ORDERS, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL S TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 18(1)(C) OF THE ACT BY PASSING A CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 29.06.2016. THE FINDING /CONCLUSION OF THE CIT(A) READS AS FOLLOWS: 2.3. AS S EEN FROM THE ABOVE FACTS, THE ISSUE IS REGARDING IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 18(1)(C) OF WEALTH TAX ACT. THE APPELLANT CLAIMS THAT ADDITION WAS MADE ON ESTIMATE BASIS AND, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO CONCEALMENT OF WEALTH, STILL THE AO HAS IMPOSED PENALTY WHICH SHOULD BE DELETED. HOWEVER, FROM THE ABOVE FACTS IT IS SEEN THAT ASSESSEE OWNED A LAND WHICH WAS NOT INCLUDED BY HIM IN THE NET WEALTH TAXABLE UNDER WEALTH TAX ACT. THERE MAY BE ESTIMATION OF VALUE OF ASSET BY THE AO BUT IS NOT DENIED THAT VALUE OF ASSETS HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN. IF THERE IS ANY MISTAKE IN THE ESTIMATION OF THE VALUE, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FURNISHED VALUE WITH ANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. THEREFORE, THE AO HAD NO OPTION BUT TO ADOPT VALUE OF LAND ON ESTIMATE. ON THESE F ACTS, THE AO WAS WELL WITHIN THE RIGHT FOR IMPOSING PENALTY ON CONCEALMENT OF WEALTH. THE PENALTY ORDER FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE HEREBY SUSTAINED AND THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT ARE DISMISSED. 8 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. NONE WAS PRESENT NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR STRONGLY RELIED ON THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE WEALTH TAX AUTHORIT IES . WTA NOS. 05 TO 09 RPR 2016 4 9 . WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . THE ASSESSEE HAD TAXABLE NET WEALTH FOR THE AY 2008 - 09 TO 2012 - 13 AND HAD NOT FILED THE RETURN OF NET WEALTH VOLUNTARILY . THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT NET WEALTH TAX HAD ESCAPEMENT ASSESSMENT , ISSUED REASSESSMENT NOTICE U/S 17 OF THE WEALTH TAX ACT, 1957 . PURSUANT TO THE REASSESSMENT NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN S OF WEALTH . THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TERMED AS VOLUNTARILY DISCLOSURE OF NET WEALTH . HAD THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOT ISSUED REASSESSMENT NOTICE U/S 17(1) OF THE WEALTH TAX ACT , T HE NET WEALTH WOULD HAVE ESCAPE D ASSESSMENT . THEREFORE THERE WAS WILLFUL DEFAULT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE NET WEALTH AND HENCE LIABLE FOR IMPOSITION PENALTY U/S 18(1)(C) OF THE WEALTH TAX ACT. FOR TAKING THE ABOVE VIEW, WE RELY ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF MAK DATA PVT. LTD. VS. CIT REPORTED IN 358 ITR 593 (SC). FOR THE AFORESAID REASONS AND THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE APEX CO URT (SUPRA) , WE DISMISS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 10 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03 . 05.2017 ) SD / - SD/ - ( N.S. SAINI ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 03 / 05 /201 7 AKS WTA NOS. 05 TO 09 RPR 2016 5 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR