Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI WASEEM AHMED
ITA No.165/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.165/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Eagle Corporation Pvt. Ltd., vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, “Ëagle House” Circle-1(2), Rajkot. Near Moti Tanki Chowk, Rajkot – 360 001. [PAN – AAACE 8903 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri B.D. Gupta, DR Date of hearing : 04.08.2022 Date of pronouncement : 14.09.2022 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 27.06.2019 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Rajkot for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:
“1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Rajkot erred in upholding the levying the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act on addition on account of interest income of Rs.3,32,587/- is unwarranted, unjustified and bad ion law.”
The assessment was completed on 26.03.2015 thereby making the addition in respect of donation, TDS expenses, income from dividends and income from interests by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer under Section 271(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 levied penalty amounting to Rs.1,99,120/- on component of interest income of Rs.3,32,587/- and interest on refund of Rs.3,11,808/-.
ITA No.165/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 of 3 4. Being aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.
At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite giving proper notices and the notice was returned with the remark of the Postal Authorities “left”. There is no fresh address filed by the assessee before the Tribunal. Hence, we are proceeding on the basis of the submissions of the assessee reproduced in the order of CIT(A) as submissions before us.
The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order, penalty order and the order of the CIT(A).
We have heard Ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available aon record. The main contention of the assessee is limited to the penalty on account of interest income amounting to Rs.3,32,587/-. After going through the submissions of the assessee, it is seen that the said amount was shown by the assessee after taking interest expenses paid to the various parties and the net interest income received by the assessee and the same was brought in the Profit & Loss account. Thus, it cannot be stated as concealment of income or filed inaccurate particulars of income as envisaged in Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) has not taken cognisance of the same and confirmed the penalty. Once the assessee has filed all the details before the AO during the assessment proceedings then the same cannot come under the purview of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Hence, penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) is not correct. Therefore, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 14th day of September, 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Accountant Member Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 14th day of September, 2022 PBN/*
ITA No.165/RJT/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 3 of 3
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY
Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rajkot Bench, Rajkot