EXPRESS WHEELS,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), BHUBANESWAR

The grievance in this appeal is The grievance in this appeal is that the CIT(A) is not that the CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the penalty of Rs.2,19,415/ justified in confirming the penalty of Rs.2,19,415/ justified in confirming the penalty of Rs.2,19,415/- imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act.

The facts of the case are that on verification of the bank The facts of the case are that on verification of the bank The facts of the case are that on verification of the bank account, the Assessing Officer noted that there are credits of account, the Assessing Officer noted that there are credits of account, the Assessing Officer noted that there are credits of Rs.73,13,808/ Rs.73,13,808/- in the bank account of the assessee, which e bank account of the assessee, which includes cash deposits of Rs.19,17,000/ includes cash deposits of Rs.19,17,000/- As there was no compliance during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing compliance during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing compliance during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer computed income of the assessee at Rs.14,62,762/ Officer computed income of the assessee at Rs.14,62,762/ Officer computed income of the assessee at Rs.14,62,762/- being @ 20% of the gross turnover of Rs.73 @ 20% of the gross turnover of Rs.73,13,808/ ,13,808/-. On appeal, the CIT(A) reduced the computation of income to 10% being CIT(A) reduced the computation of income to 10% being CIT(A) reduced the computation of income to 10% being Rs.7,31,880/ Rs.7,31,880/- as against 20% computed by the Assessing Officer. as against 20% computed by the Assessing Officer.

Therefore, Therefore, Therefore, the the the Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer levied levied levied penalty penalty penalty of of of Rs.4,38,830/ Rs.4,38,830/- holding holding that that total total income income assessed assessed of of Rs.14,62,760/ ,62,760/- is the concealed income of the assessee. is the concealed income of the assessee.

On appeal, the CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to On appeal, the CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to On appeal, the CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to reduce the quantum of penalty by taking concealed income of reduce the quantum of penalty by taking concealed income of reduce the quantum of penalty by taking concealed income of Rs.7,31,880/ Rs.7,31,880/- determined by the CIT(A) in quantum proceedings. determined by the CIT(A) in quantum proceedings. Still further, the as Still further, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. sessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

Having heard the rival submissions, I observe that there Having heard the rival submissions, I observe that there Having heard the rival submissions, I observe that there were deposits of Rs.73,13,808/ were deposits of Rs.73,13,808/-m in HDFC bank accounts m in HDFC bank accounts and the assessee did not file the details before the Assessing Officer assessee did not file the details before the Assessing Officer assessee did not file the details before the Assessing Officer despite various opportunitie despite various opportunities given. It was in this backdrop that s given. It was in this backdrop that the authorities below were of the opinion that the assessee has the authorities below were of the opinion that the assessee has the authorities below were of the opinion that the assessee has concealed the particulars of its income. However, concealed the particulars of its income. However, concealed the particulars of its income. However, the CIT(A) felt that the estimation of income is unreasonable and, accordingly, that the estimation of income is unreasonable and, accordingly, that the estimation of income is unreasonable and, accordingly, reduced the same to 10 reduced the same to 10% and confirmed the addition of % and confirmed the addition of Rs.7,31,880/ Rs.7,31,880/-.

From the above, it is clear that the assessee has concealed From the above, it is clear that the assessee has concealed From the above, it is clear that the assessee has concealed the particulars of income because the assessee did not file the particulars of income because the assessee did not file the particulars of income because the assessee did not file return of income and also did not file of income and also did not file the details as called for by the the details as called for by the Assessing officer. Accordingly, I concur with the findings of the Assessing officer. Accordingly, I concur with the findings of the Assessing officer. Accordingly, I concur with the findings of the lower authorities and confirm the levy of penalty of Rs.2,19,415/ lower authorities and confirm the levy of penalty of Rs.2,19,415/ lower authorities and confirm the levy of penalty of Rs.2,19,415/- and dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee. Consequently, and dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee. Consequently, and dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. the appeal is dismissed.

The grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) is not The grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) is not The grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the penalty of Rs.25,000/ justified in confirming the penalty of Rs.25,000/ justified in confirming the penalty of Rs.25,000/- levied u/s.271A of the Act for non of the Act for non-maintenance of books of account maintenance of books of account.

Ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that due to serious A.R. of the assessee submitted that due to serious A.R. of the assessee submitted that due to serious dispute between the partners, the assessee could not maintain the dispute between the partners, the assessee could not maintain the dispute between the partners, the assessee could not maintain the books of account. books of account.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the have heard the rival submissions and perused the have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record materials available on record of the Tribunal of the Tribunal. The undisputed facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the acts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the acts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee failed to keep and maintain books of account as per assessee failed to keep and maintain books of account as per assessee failed to keep and maintain books of account as per provisions of section 44AA of the Income tax Act, 1961 and, provisions of section 44AA of the Income tax Act, 1961 and, provisions of section 44AA of the Income tax Act, 1961 and, therefore, he levied penalty of R.25,000/ therefore, he levied penalty of R.25,000/- u/s.271A of the Act for u/s.271A of the Act for non-maintenance of books of account in violation of section 44AA maintenance of books of account in violation of section 44AA maintenance of books of account in violation of section 44AA of the Act, which was confirmed in first appeal. , which was confirmed in first appeal.

Section 273B provides as under: Section 273B provides as under:

The above section provides that if the assessee proves that The above section provides that if the assessee proves that The above section provides that if the assessee proves that there is a reasonable cause, he is not subject to levy of penalty. there is a reasonable cause, he is not subject to levy of penalty. there is a reasonable cause, he is not subject to levy of penalty. The case of the assessee is that The case of the assessee is that due to serious dispute among the due to serious dispute among the

In this appeal, the assessee agitated the confirmation of In this appeal, the assessee agitated the confirmation of In this appeal, the assessee agitated the confirmation of penalty of Rs.5000/ penalty of Rs.5000/- levied u/s.271F of the Act. levied u/s.271F of the Act.

I have the rival submissions and perused the record of the I have the rival submissions and perused the record of the I have the rival submissions and perused the record of the case.

The Assessing Officer has levied penalty u/s.271F of the Act The Assessing Officer has levied penalty u/s.271F of the Act The Assessing Officer has levied penalty u/s.271F of the Act on the ground that the assessee has failed to furnish return of on the ground that the assessee has failed to furnish return of on the ground that the assessee has failed to furnish return of income on or before 31.3.2014 without a reasonable cause. I income on or before 31.3.2014 without a reasonable cause. I income on or before 31.3.2014 without a reasonable cause. I find

The The The disturbance disturbance disturbance caused caused caused among among among the the the partners partners partners steps steps steps compelled to closure of the business could not constitute a valid compelled to closure of the business could not constitute a valid compelled to closure of the business could not constitute a valid ground for the delay in furnishing the return of income, as income ground for the delay in furnishing the return of income, as income ground for the delay in furnishing the return of income, as income from the said concern, a partnership firm, if any, is exempt under from the said concern, a partnership firm, if any, is exempt under from the said concern, a partnership firm, if any, is exempt under s. 10(2A) of the Act. In other words, the assessee could well have s. 10(2A) of the Act. In other words, the assessee could well have s. 10(2A) of the Act. In other words, the assessee could well have filed his return of income, clearly stating that the income from the filed his return of income, clearly stating that the income from the filed his return of income, clearly stating that the income from the partnership firm, if any, is tax exempt, is not being partnership firm, if any, is tax exempt, is not being partnership firm, if any, is tax exempt, is not being disclosed, being indeterminate, if indeed so at the relevant date. being indeterminate, if indeed so at the relevant date. being indeterminate, if indeed so at the relevant date. I am of the view that the assessee has not been able to show any reasonable view that the assessee has not been able to show any reasonable view that the assessee has not been able to show any reasonable cause(s) for not furnishing the return of income by 31st March, cause(s) for not furnishing the return of income by 31st March, cause(s) for not furnishing the return of income by 31st March, 2004 and, thus, the levy is not saved by s. 2004 and, thus, the levy is not saved by s. 273B. As such, the 273B. As such, the impugned default can only be considered as a conscious disregard impugned default can only be considered as a conscious disregard impugned default can only be considered as a conscious disregard of one’s statutory obligations, and the of one’s statutory obligations, and therefore, the refore, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer is confirmed. the Assessing Officer is confirmed.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.