Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (7) TMI 597

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nnot be quashed. It is ordered accordingly. we hold that the CIT(A) is justified in upholding the order passed u/s 272A(2)(c) - Decided against assessee. - ITA No.441/Coch/2019, SA No.39/Coch/2019 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2019 - Shri Chandra Poojari, AM And Shri George George K, JM For the Assessee : Smt.Swathy S. Advocate For the Revenue : Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR ORDER PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JM : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A) dated 26.02.2019. The relevant assessment year is 2011-2012. The order of the CIT(A) arises out of the order passed u/s 272A(2)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee has also filed stay application seeking to stay the recovery of outstanding tax arrears. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follow: 2.1 The assessee is a Co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The assessee was served with notice u/s 133(6) of the Income-tax Act. The assessee was directed to furnish details of the persons who had deposited above  .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1 and refers to different contexts and that the information for the purpose of the Act which are useful for, or relevant to any enquiry only shall be called for under Section 133(6) and that there was no mention in the notice issued by Income Tax Officer (I CI) about any such enquiry under the Income Tax Act 1961. E. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that the imposition of penalty is time barred under section 275(1) (c) of The Income Tax Act 1961in as much as the proceedings for imposition of penalty was initiated on the date of notice issued by the Income Tax Officer (I CI), Kochi for the initiation of such proceedings. G. The provision u/s 272(A)(2) permits to impose penalty for a sum of ₹ 100/- for every day during which the failure continues. In the case of this appeal the appellant has sought time to produce the details by written letter. But the respondent has not rejected the request of the appellant. Later the Joint Director of Income Tax(I CI), Kochi (Intelligence), in his notice dated 01-06-2015 asked to show cause why penalty proceedings under section 272A should not be initiated. The respondent ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 133(6) of the I T Act: Section 133(6) of the I T Act 1961 is unambiguous and clear. The department under the said section has power to call for information in relation to such points or matters which would be useful for, or relevant to any proceeding under the Act from 'any person' including a 'Banking Company' or 'any Officer' thereon. Later, an amendment was introduced as per the Finance Act 1995 whereby, the words ''enquiry or were inserted before the word ''proceeding'' in Section 133(6), also adding the '2nd proviso' to the said provision, with effect from 1.7.1995. The effect of the said amendment is that, the power to call for information under the un-amended Act which was confined only in relation to a 'pending proceeding' came to be widened, and even in a case where no proceeding was pending, such information could be called for as part of the enquiry, subject to the rider that, such power was not to be exercised by any income tax authority below the rank of Director or Commissioner without the prior approval of the Director or the Commiss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... her they are in compliance with the provisions of the Act. It would not fall under the restricted domains of being area specific or case specific . Section 133(6) does not refer to any enquiry about any particular person or assessee, but pertains to information in relation to such points or matters which the assessing authority issuing notices requires. This clearly illustrates that the information of general nature can be called for and names and addresses of depositors who hold deposits above a particular sum is certainly permissible. 20. In the instant case, by the impugned notice the assessing authority sought for information in respect of its customers which have cash transactions or deposits of ₹ 1,00,000 or above for a period of three years, without reference to any proceeding or enquiry pending before any authority under the Act. Admittedly, in the present case, notice was issued only after obtaining approval of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Co chin. In the light of the aforesaid, we are of the considered opinion that the assessing authority has not erred in issuing the notice to the assessee-financial institution requiring it to furnish info .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reasons, I hold that the order passed by the Jt Director of Income Tax (Intelligence) is a valid order. (iii) there was reasonable cause, as mentioned in section 2738 of the Act for non furnishing information sought u/s 133(6); therefore, penalty u/s 272A(2) (c) of the I TAct is to be quashed: 8.6 The assessee has not offered any valid reason for not furnishing the information called for u/s 133(6) of the Act. Many of the notices issued by the ITO (Intelligence) were never responded to by the assessee. In many instances the Assessing Officer has mentioned that when they had approached, the assessee Society, for seeking information u/s 133(6) of the Act there was total lack of co-operation on the part of the assessee society as well as threat (reference order imposing penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) in appeals ITA No.202/C/2017 and ITA N0.217/C/ 2017). Since there is no reasonable cause furnished by the assessee as mentioned u/s 2738 of the I T Act for non furnishing of information sought by the ITO(intelligence) u/s 133(6) of the Act I am of the view that the order imposing penalty cannot be quashed. It is ordered accordingly. 9 In t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates