9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 1037X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judication of the quantum additions, shall take a call as to whether penalty is to be imposed upon the assessee or not. In other words, the ld.CIT(A) shall decide the issue regarding levy of penalty after determination of the income in pursuance of Tribunal s order in the above three years. Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose - ITA.No.201 to 203/Ahd/2020 - - - Dated:- 29-6-2021 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President And Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member For the Assessee : S/Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv With Parimalsinh B. Parmar,AR, Vijay Govani, AR and Khyati Chugh, AR For the Revenue : Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.DR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT: Present three appeals are directed at the instance of the assessee against the orders of the ld.CIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad of even dated i.e. 27.2.2019. The ld.AO imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively for the above three assessment years. These orders were confirmed by the ld.CIT(A), which are impugned in these appeals. Thus, the sole issue raised is common in all these appeals, therefore for the convenience of adjudication of the same, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us time to gather all the relevant documents and hand it over to our subsequent Chartered Accountant. 2. I say and submit that under such circumstances there is a delay in filing the Appeal before Your Honors. However, I respectfully submit that there is prime facie good case my favour. Hence, it is respectfully prayed to Your Honors that looking the reasons as stated, I request Your Honour to kindly condone the delay caused in filing Appeal before Your Honour, in the interest of Justice and the appeal may be heard and decided on merits to protect the rights and interest of the deponent. The ld.counsel for the assessee reiterating contents of the affidavit-cum-delay condonation application duly sworn by the assessee, and submitted that reasons stated by the assessee are genuine and reasonable, which justify the delay occurred in filing appeals before the Tribunal, therefore, the same deserves to be condoned, and the appeals be decided on merit. 3. The ld.DR, on the other hand, contended that there is no material possessed by the assessee to substantiate this assertion of the facts. He has not deposed the name of the tax consultant, while leveling allegations agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pronouncement of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of N.Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (supra). It reads as under: Rule of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. Law of limitation fixes a life-span for such legal remedy for the redress of the legal injury so suffered. Time is precious and the wasted time would never revisit. During efflux of time newer causes would sprout up necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the courts. So a life span must be fixed for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. Law of limitation is thus founded on public policy. It is enshrined in the maxim Interest reipublicae up sit finis litium (it is for the general welfare that a period be putt to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of the parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy prom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o decided the appeals on merit. 8. As aforesaid, grounds raised in the appeals are identical except variation in quantum. Sum and substance of the facts, as emerging from the relevant orders of lower authorities, required for adjudication of common issue on hand are that, assessee is an individual having income from business, and other sources like interest income. A search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried out in the group cases of Thakore group, which was engaged in sale and purchase of land. Search action was also conducted at the residential premises of the assessee on 21.9.2010. A notice under section 153A(a) of the Act was issued on 8.10.2011, and in response to which, the assessee filed return of income on 14.12.2012. Thereafter the assessment under section 153A r.w.s. 144 of the Act was finalised on 30.3.2013. The ld.AO in the assessment orders made the following additions: Asstt.Year 2004-05 i) Total Income as per return ₹ 69,510/- ii) Add: Unexplained Investment in land 77 ₹ 5,13,833/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd copy of order of the Tribunal dated 27.12.2017. The Tribunal has disposed of seven appeals pertaining to three assessees by common order. The ld.counsel for the assessee further contended that since the quantum in dispute is still pending before the ld.first appellate authority, therefore, the penalty issue be remitted back to the file of the ld.CIT(A). 12. On the other hand, the ld.DR was unable to controvert the contentions of the ld.counsel for the assessee. 13. We have considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully. We find that the additions leading to these penalties were disputed by the assessee before the Tribunal in IT(SS)A.No.112 to 116/Ahd/2015 cited (supra). The relevant part of the order of the Tribunal reads as under: Per Bench : 1. By way of these seven appeals, the assessee-appellant(s) has challenged the correctness of the ex-parte orders, all dated 09.01.2015, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad in the matter of assessment under section 153A r.w.s 144 / 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. 1961, for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2009-10 2011-12. 2. When these appeals w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c) provides mechanism for quantification of penalty. It reads as under: ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... ...... (iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c) or clause (d), in addition to tax, if any, payable by him, a sum which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed three times, the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of the concealment of particulars of his income or fringe benefits or the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income or fringe benefits. 9. This sub-clause contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. In other words, the quantification of the penalty is depended upon the addition made to the income of the assessee. In the present case, the assessee has filed appeals before the Tribunal against these quantum additions in all these three years under consideration. The Tribunal vide order dated 27.12.2017 (supra) has remitted the issue of additions to the file of the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
