9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore ld. CIT(Appeals) at the first appellate proceedings. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that during the course of assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 30,40,620/- on account of unexplained cash deposit in the bank account. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to provide details of Rs. 30,40,620/- on account of cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. The assessee had provided details of 10 persons out of 27 from whom he allegedly claimed to have received cash. The assessee could not prove basic conditions, therefore, Assessing Officer made addition accordingly. Penalty proceedings were also initiated. The assessee provided details of 10 persons which were also incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issed the appeal of the assessee. It was submitted that in the quantum proceedings, the assessee could not file additional evidences due to family circumstances and case was decided by the ld. CIT(Appeals) against the assessee. Therefore, additional evidences were filed before ITAT Chandigarh Bench. The additional evidences filed in the shape of confirmations from most of the persons with their address, copies of bills raised by the assessee, therefore, assessee made a prayer that same may be admitted as additional evidence under Rule 46A of the IT Rules. It was submitted that assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are independent therefore, additional evidences which are vital in nature, may be admitted in the penalty appellate pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idences in the penalty proceedings which are independent and all together different proceedings. He has submitted that in the same circumstances, ITAT 'SMC' Bench Chandigarh in the case of Jorawar Singh Vs ITO ITA No. 629/2016 dated 22.07.2016 admitted the additional evidences being relevant in the penalty proceedings and restored the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for re- consideration. Copy of the order is placed on record. He has, therefore, submitted that additional evidences may be admitted and matter may be remanded to the Assessing Officer for re-consideration. 5(i) On the other hand, ld. DR relied upon orders of the authorities below and submitted that once Tribunal on quantum have not admitted the additional evidences, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Singh Village Galedva Tehsil Pehowa District Kurukshetra PAN: ACBPS3332E (Appellant) Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kurukshetra (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal Respondent by : Shri S.K. Mittal, DR Date of hearing : 20.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 22.07.2016 ORDER This appeal by the assessee has been directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Karnal dated 5.4.2016 for assessment year 2008-09, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. During the assessment proceedings, a disallowance of Rs.6,42,870/- was made out of the claim of commission paid by the assessee. The CIT (Appeals) as well the I.T.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the CIT (Appeals), therefore, the same may not be admitted for hearing. 4. On consideration of the rival contentions and material available on record, I am of the view that though the findings given in the quantum proceedings are relevant and have probative value but these are not conclusive for levy of penalty against the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is well settled that the quantum and penalty proceedings are distinct and independent proceedings. The assessee in the penalty proceedings still could have explained that it is not a case of levy of penalty based on the evidence on record. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram Vs. CIT, 262 CTR 118 (SC) and the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers of the authorities below and restore the issue of levy of penalty to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to redecide the issue in the light of additional evidence so admitted above. The assessee is directed to produce these evidences before the Assessing Officer for consideration. The Assessing Officer shall give sufficient opportunity for hearing to the assessee. 6. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court." 7. Considering the facts of the case in the light of order in the case of Jorawar Singh (supra), I set aside the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) in refusing to admit additional evidences. These additional evidences being relevant, shall h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
