TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer is satisfied in the course of any proceedings under this Act that any person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. In the present case, the AO passed ex-parte order and has levied penalty for concealment of such income or non furnishing of particulars u/s 271(1)(c). Rightly pointing the issue is that the assessee has not replied or non compliances for the notice issued by the AO, where the penalty should be levied u/s 271(1)(b). Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is liveable. He erred upholding the order by the AO, Where the assessee made an attempt to explain and submitted detailed written submissions before CIT(A) and produced the evidences of Bank Accounts, Bank certificate and details of cash deposits also.. There is no failure on part of the assessee in explaining the source of cash deposit, the Bank Statement, Bank certificate. There is no finding of the AO based on some contradictory evidence to disapprove that explanation offered by the assessee was false or the assessee was not able to substantiate the explanation furnished or fails to prove that such expl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are the Johdinda Bhojpura Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti Limited is a Co-operative Society is doing business of trading of food grain and fertilizer and of mini banking and is also modal agency for payment under NAREGA, certificate for registration under Co-operative Society and mini bank kept on record. 3.1 Taxable income of Co-operative Society for Assessment Year 2010-11 was below taxable limit therefore it has not filed any return of income of A.Y 2010-11. 3.2 The Sahakari Samiti is engaged in trading of food grain and fertilizers and also doing work of mini bank. The Sahakari Samiti is also nodal agency for payments made under NAREGA. During the F.Y 2009-10 the Sahakari Samiti has received sum of ₹ 1,81,36,602/- from Government for payments to be made to workers under NAREGA, copies of few sanction letters is enclosed here with. For making payments to workers Sahakari Samiti withdraws cash from bank in lumpsum and at the end of day or a period surplus amount, if any, remains with deposited back in Bank account. 3.3 For distributing the sum so received amongst the workers under Narega Scheme, during the F.Y 2009-10 the Sahakari Samiti has withdrawal sum of ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clear that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and that the assessing officer was justified in levying the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and dismissed the assessee appeal. 7. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. Before the CIT (A), the assessee has reiterated that his submissions and which was not taken on record by the CIT (A). before us the Ld AR for assessee submitted a detailed Written submissions dated 18.02.2022 which are as under 1. Background 1.1 The Appellant is a registered Cooperative Society doing business of Mini Banking and trading of food grain and fertilizer and is also Nodal Agency for Payment under NREGA. [Refer page no. 20 and 25 of Paper Book ( PB )] 1.2 With respect to the subject AY the Ld. AO initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and issued notices under section 148 of the Act at the address VPO Panchala via Phagi Jaipur. 1.3 The proceeding was initiated as an information was received by the Ld. AO that cash of INR 12,51,000/- was deposited in the bank account of the Appellant and no return was filed by the Appellant. Therefore the Ld. AO initiated the proceedings to gather th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Appellant furnished a detailed submission and all the documents vide submission dated 22 July 2021, 19 Oct 2021, 08 Feb 2021 [Refer page no 1 to 8 and 30 to 33 of PB] 2.3 In the submission filed on 22 July 2021, the Appellant duly explained the source of cash deposit [Refer page no. 3 of PB], the same is summarized as under: - As the appellant is an authorized nodal agency for payment under NREGA, therefore consideration is received from Government for payments to be made to workers under NREGA. For making payments to workers the Sahakari Samiti withdraws cash from bank in lump sum and at the end of day or a period surplus amount if any, remaining is deposited back in the Bank account. - During the year under consideration the Sahakari Samiti has withdrawn sum of INR 2,24,27,500.00/- from bank and deposited back cash of INR 12,51,000.00/- in bank account. All cash deposit is out of surplus withdrawals made from bank. - The excess cash deposited was on the following dates: Date Amount of Cash Deposited Source of cash deposit 02 April 2009 41,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s 250 on 26.11.2021. In the order passed the NFAC have mentioned about the submission filed on page 2 to 5 of the order and passed their decision under point 4. wherein: - Some random figure of INR 17,73,675 was mentioned as addition of cash deposit [Para 4.1 of order]; - The NFAC stated that no explanation is provided for cash deposited by the appellant, without even mentioning about all the documents, evidences furnished during the proceedings [Para 4.3 of order] - And at last stated the following under para 4.7: In view of above facts and that no further cogent evidences or arguments have been put forth by the appellant during the course of appellate penalty proceedings, it is quite clear that the appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, the Ld. Assessing Officer was justified inlevied the penalty u/s 271(1)(C) of the Act. Thus, the penalty is confirmed. 2.6 The above order passed is completely baseless as all the evidences were furnished by the appellant before the CIT(A)/ NFAC relating to deposit of cash. The CIT(A) have passed the order without taking into consideration the written submission, facts, documents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty for concealment of such income or non furnishing of particulars u/s 271(1)(c). Rightly pointing the issue is that the assessee has not replied or non compliances for the notice issued by the AO, where the penalty should be levied u/s 271(1)(b). 10.2 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is liveable. It is submitted that the facts and circumstances of the case that there is neither concealment of income nor furnishing of any inaccurate particulars and hence provisions of section 271(1)(c) is not applicable without considering the evidences furnished before the CIT(A). 10.3 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred upholding the order by the AO, Where the assessee made an attempt to explain and submitted detailed written submissions before CIT(A) and produced the evidences of Bank Accounts, Bank certificate and details of cash deposits also. 10.4 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in relying on the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs Dharmendra Textile Processors (2008 ) 13 SCC 369 and in the case of CIT Ahmadbad Vs Reliance Petroproducts (P) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
