Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.80 & 81/Rpr/2015 Assessment Year : 1997-98 & 1998-99
Indradev Shrivastava, Vs. ITO, Jagdalpur (C.G.)- Kondagaon (C.G.) 494001 PAN/GIR No. ACFPS 6736 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : None Revenue by : Mrs. Shabana Parveen, DR
Date of Hearing : 18/01/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 19 /01/ 2018
O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, JM These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the order of the
CIT(A)-Raipur, dated 25.03.2015 for the assessment year 1997-98 & 1998-
Since issue involved in both the appeals is common, for the sake of
convenience, we take up the appeal in ITA No.80/Rpr/15 for consideration.
The assessee is aggrieved by the confirmation of penalty of
Rs.10,000/- levied u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act.
Briefly stated the facts are that the Assessing Officer on the basis of
information received from District Authorities regarding transaction in
agricultural and forest produce, issued notice u/s.148 of the Act. Further, he
3 ITA No.80 & 81/Rpr/2015 Assessment Year : 1997-98 & 1998-99 7. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called for
hearing. However, a paper book has been filed before us. Hence, we
proceed to dispose of the appeals exparte qua the assessee on the basis of
materials available on record and after hearing ld D.R.
Ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities. Ld D.R. submitted
that the assessee in an ulterior motive avoided to attend the hearing before
the Assessing Officer, therefore penalty was rightly imposed.
We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower
authorities and materials available on record. Prima facie, the contention
of the assessee as per the submission filed before us that the assessee
against the original assessment order passed u/s.144 filed appeal before the
CIT(A) and CIT(A) has granted part relief to the assessee. Subsequently,
the Assessing Officer has passed order giving appeal effect to the quantum
appeal and the income is below the taxable limit and no tax is leviable. The
department has not filed appeal against the order of the CIT(A) before the
ITAT and the matter has become final. Considering these facts, it was
pleaded in the written submission that the penalty be cancelled. Reliance
was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Hindustan Steel ltd., 83 ITRR 26(SC), wherein, it has been held as under:
5 ITA No.80 & 81/Rpr/2015 Assessment Year : 1997-98 & 1998-99 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Indradev Shrivastava, Kondagaon (C.G.) 2. The Respondent. , Jagdalpur (C.G.)- 494001 3. The CIT(A)- Raipur 4. Pr.CIT- Raipur 5. DR, ITAT, Raipur 6. Guard file. //True Copy//
BY ORDER,
SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Raipur