TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 565X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delete the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2016-17 - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos 235 to 241/Ind/2018, ITA Nos 242 to 248/Ind/2018, ITA Nos 249 to 255/Ind/2018 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2020 - Hon'ble Kul Bharat, Judicial Member And Hon'ble Manish Borad, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Ms. Nisha Lahoti, C.A For the Revenue : Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT ORDER PER BENCH. The above captioned appeals are at the instance of respective assessee(s) which are directed against separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal (in short Ld.CIT ], Indore evenly dated 30.01.2018. 2. As the issue and facts raised in all these appeals are similar, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed penalty order u/s 271(1)(b) on 25.10.2017 imposing a penalty of ₹ 10,000 for each of the seven years i.e. AY 2010-11 to 2016-17. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) sustained the penalty of ₹ 10,000 imposed by Ld. A.O for each of the seven years i.e. AY ~ 2010-11 to 2016-17. 4. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the following written submission placed on record. A. Assessments completed u/s 153A rws 143(3) for AY 2010-11 to 2015-16 and u/s 143(3) for AY 2016-17 1.Assessments for AY 2010-11 to 2015-16 have been completed u/s 153A rws 143(3) and for AY 2016-17 u/s 143(3). Assessee filed replies be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cific show cause query raised wherein Ms. Manu Rai required to explain the source of this cash failing which amount of ₹ 3,8,6,900/- was proposed to be added. In her reply assessee claimed that the cash belonged to her father .. [PB 3 para 8] d. In this regard specific show cause query raised wherein Ms. Manu Rai required to explain the source of this cash failing which amount of ₹ 75,000/was proposed to be added. In her reply assessee claimed that the cash belonged to her father [PB 4 para 9] e. During the course of assessment proceedings 22/05/2017, the assessee was required to explain the nature of possession and source/mode of acquisition of such jewellery and reconcile the same with her declared income/assets. Fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 98/Ind/2016 to 804/Und/2016 order dated 16.05.2018 - Hon ble Bench of Indore ITAT. (ii) Akhil Bharatiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust (2008) 115 TTJ 419- Hon'ble Delhi Bench of ITAT. (iii) Hemant Kumar Soni ITA No.1361/Ind/2016 to 1367/Ind/2016 Hon'ble Indore Bench of I.T.A.T. (iv) Vineet Chauhan ITA No.1061/Ind/2016 to 1067/Ind/2016 - Hon'ble Indore Bench of I.T.A.T. (v) M. Ahuja Construction Private Limited ITA No.655/Ind/2016 to 657/Ind/2016 - Hon'ble Indore Bench of I.T.A.T. 6. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting order of both the lower authorities but could not controvert the fact that the issue is squarely covered by various decision of jurisdictional Indore Bench o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20.3.2017 holding that the penalty was not leviable for non compliance of notice u/s 271(b) of the Act as the assessment were framed u/s 143(3) of the Act showing that necessary co-operation was given by the assessee for completing the assessment proceedings. 7. Examining the facts of the instant case in the light of above decision, we find that in the case of Regent Beers Wines Ltd the assessment for Assessment Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 is framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3)of the Act and in the case of Patel Education Welfare Society Assessment Year 2010-11 framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. We are therefore of the considered opinion that in all the three cases as the assessment orders have been framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s after attending the proceedings on subsequent dates. Based on these compliances the assessments were completed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) for A.Y 2010-11 to 2015-16 and u/s 143(3) for A.Y 2016-17. Needless to mention that none of the assessment orders were framed ex-parte. 10. We therefore in the given facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following above decisions of the Tribunal, direct the revenue authorities to delete the penalty of ₹ 10,000/- levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2016-17 in the case of Mrs. Manu Rai (ITA No.235 to 241/Ind/2018). The sole ground raised in all the seven appeals stands allowed. 11. Now we take up the remaining appeals of the assessee(s) namely Manish Rai ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
