9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA No.5645/Del/2018, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 19.06.2018 and in ITA No.5646/Del/2018 sought to set aside the impugned order dated 19.06.2018 by confirming the penalty order dated 12.05.2017 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), by ld. CIT (Appeals), Meerut qua the assessment year 2009-10 on the grounds inter alia that :- "ITA NO.5645/DEL/2018 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the L'd Assessing Officer has passed order U/S 147/144 without jurisdiction and the L'd Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the same mutatis mutandis. 2. That the L'd Lower Authorities have erred in assuming that the notice U/S 148 must have been served on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of giving any explanation for the cash deposited in bank account did not arise what to say of a satisfactory explanation. 3. That the L'd Assessing officer has erred in simply relying on his observations and findings in the quantum assessment whereas the impugned proceedings being quasi criminal in nature should have been addressed independently." ITA NO.5614/DEL/2018 3. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : Assessee is an agriculturist and Assessing Officer noticed that he has deposited a cash amount of Rs. 15,62,200/- in his bank account during the year under assessment and consequently, the case was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') by is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The ld. DR for the Revenue by relying upon the order passed by the AO as well as ld. CIT (A) contended that when undisputedly Chand Tari, relative of Sohanbeer Singh has sold the land for Rs. 9,31,000/- then from where the remaining amount has been deposited in the account of assessee and he has further stated that when Sohanbeer Singh himself is maintaining the account, there was no ground for depositing the said amount in the name of the assessee. 8. However, to repel the aforesaid arguments of ld. DR, the ld. AR for the assessee contended that the amount of Rs. 14,03,200/- was taken as sale consideration but the sale deed was got executed on the circle rate and Sohanbeer Singh was having bank account at Village Kinoni and the cash amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heard to the assessee. So, the aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. ITA NO.5646/DEL/2018 11. On the basis of assessment framed u/s 144/147, AO initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. On failure of the assessee to appear and defend the penalty proceedings, AO proceeded to levy the penalty to the tune of Rs. 4,23,700/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income. 12. However, we are of the considered view that since the assessment order framed u/s 144/147 of the Act on the basis of which penalty proceedings were initiated has been set aside to the file of AO to decide afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the penalty proceedings being c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
