SPR Infrastructure India Limited , Hyderabad v. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1828/Hyd/2019 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2021 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 182822514 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN AACCD4913G
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1828/Hyd/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant SPR Infrastructure India Limited , Hyderabad
Respondent Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 24-05-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB-A
Tribunal Order Date 24-05-2021
Last Hearing Date 19-05-2021
First Hearing Date 19-05-2021
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 20-12-2019
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/20 1 9 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 10) M/S. SPR INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) LIMITED 8 - 2 - 293/82/A22 SOURYA SOUDHA PLOT 22 ROAD NO.5 JUBILEE HILLS HYDERABAD - 500 0 33 PAN AACCD4913G ..APPELLANT. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2) HYDERABAD. ..RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI P. MURALI MOHAN RAO. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNKU SRINIVAS (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 19.05 .2021. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 .05. 2021. O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU A .M. : THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL ARISES FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) - 3 HYDERABAD ORDER DT. PASSED IN CASE NO. 1158/ACIT CIR.3(2)/CIT(A) - 2 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 3/2012 - 13 IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 221(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT). 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2009 - 10 ON 29.09.2009 WITHOUT PAYING SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX U/S.140A OF THE ACT DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1 17 83 190. SUBSEQUENTLY ON THE SCRUTINY THE ASSESSEE'S INCOME WAS DETE RMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.17 34 74 851 AND CONSEQUENTIAL DEMAND ON THE INCOME AND INTEREST THEREON WAS DETERMINED AT RS.8 51 87 390. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PAY THE DEMAND WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED ORDER U/ S. 221(1) OF THE ACT LEVYING PENALTY OF RS.1 LAC. THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE DEEMED TO BE DEFAULT AS PER SECTION 220 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ('THE ACT') AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S. 221(1) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY TH E ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). IN THE CASE ON HAND THE CIT(A) - III HYDERABAD HAS ALLOWED THE ASSESSEE PAYMENT OF TAXES IN 3 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 INSTALMENTS IN SPITE OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PAID IN INSTALMENT. THE CIT(A) SUSTAINED T HE PENALTY OF RS.1 LAC LEVIED U/S. 22 1 (1) OF THE ACT . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3 . THE LD. AR HAS REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. FURTHER T HE LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE PENALTY OF RS.1 LAC WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE ASSESSEE'S FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS AND SUBMITTED CASE LAWS FOR OUR CONS IDERATION : I) DCIT VS . ANJANEYA LIFE CARE LTD. ITA NO.6440/MUM/2013 DT.25.03.2015. II) SAMA RAMACHANDRA REDDY VS. DCIT ITA NO.164/HYD/2018 DT.11.06.2020. III) HEDDLE KNOWLEDGE (P) LTD. VS. ITO ITA NO.7509/MUM/2011 DT.19.01.2018. IV) PLR PROJECTS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT ITA NO.2408/HYD.2018 DT.26.04.2019. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISIONS (SUPRA) THE LD. AR PRAYED FOR ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 4. THE LEARNED D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE IS TO BE TREATED AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE DID NO T PAID THE INSTALMENTS AS GRANTED BY CIT(A) - III HYDERABAD. EVEN THE ASSESSEE WAS TO BE PAID SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX BEFORE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME. TILL DATE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PAID THE DUE TAXES. 5 . AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIE S AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD WE OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME WITHOUT PAYMENT OF SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX AND THE CASE WAS ASSESSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT AND THERE WAS A TOTAL DEMAND RAISED BY THE REVENUE AT RS.8 51 87 390 WHICH WA S NOT PAID BY THE ASSESSEE AS PER DEMAND NOTICE ISSU ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SOUGHT FOR PAYMENT OF TAX IN INSTALMENTS BEFORE THE CIT(A) - III HYDERABAD AND HE ALLOWED THE ASSESSEE FOR PAYMENT IN INSTALMENTS BUT EVEN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PAY THE INSTALMENTS GRANTED BY THE 5 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 CIT(A) - III HYDERABAD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED ORDER U/S. 221 OF THE ACT BY OBSERVING AS UNDER : ORDER U/S.221(1) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 : IT IS SEEN FROM THE RECORDS OF THE ABOVE ASSESSEE COMPANY THAT THE FOLLOWING AMOUNT OF TAX ARREARS REMAIN TO BE PAID: ASST. YEAR TAX & INTEREST (RS.) NATURE 2009 - 10 8 51 87 390 REGULAR TAX 2009 - 10 1 00 000 PENALTY U/S.271B 2009 - 10 10 000 PENALTY U/S.271(1)(B) VIDE THIS OFFICE LETTER DATED 7 - 2 - 2012 THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR PAYMENT OF THE ABOVE UNPAID TAXES IMMEDIATELY FAILING WHICH IT WAS INTIMATED THAT COERCIVE STEPS FOR COLLECTION OF THE TAXES WOULD BE TAKE N. IN RESPONSE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PETITION SEEKING STAY OF COLLECTION OF DEMAND U/S 220(3) BEFORE THE CIT - III HYDERABAD. IN RESPONSE THE CIT - III HYDERABAD HAS PASSED AN ORDER U/S 220 OF THE I.T.ACT 1951 DATED 1 - 3 - 2012 AS FOLLOWS: 2. ON CAR EFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS OF TILE CASE IT IS DIRECTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL PAY THE DEMAND AS PER THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE AND FURNISH PROOF OF SUCH PAYMENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN THAT PERIOD. AMOUNT (RS.) DUE DATE 15 LAKHS 15.3.2012 15 LAKHS 25.3.2012 20 LAKHS 20.4.2012 6 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 3. SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE THE BALANCE DEMAND SHALL BE KEPT IN ABEYANCE TILL MAY 15 TH 2012 OR DISPOSAL OF THE FIRST APPEAL WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. HOWEVER IT IS SEEN THAT THE COMPANY HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT BY NOT PAYING THE INSTALMENTS AS PER THE PAYMENT SCHEDULE GIVEN TO IT. HENCE A LETTER DATED 16 - 3 - 2012 W AS ADDRESSED TO THE ASSESSEE INTIMATING OF ITS DEFAULT AND NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT AND THEREBY THE ASSESSEE WAS TREATED AS AN 'ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT'. HENCE IT WAS PROPOSED ONCE AGAIN TO TAKE COERCIVE ACTION TO RECOVER THE TAXES DUE FROM THE COMP - ANY AND THE COMPANY WAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO PAY ITS TAX ARREARS ON OR BEFORE 19 - 3 - 20L2 BEFORE ANY COERCIVE ACTION WAS TO BE TAKEN. THE COMPANY HAS HOWEVER NOT AVAILED THIS OPPORTUNITY ALSO AND HAS NOT PAID THE TAX ARREARS EVEN AS ON DAT E. HENCE A NOTICE U/S 221 DATED 09 - 05 - 2012 WAS ISSUED TO THE COMPANY INTIMATING IT OF ITS TAX ARREARS AS ABOVE AND ASKING IT TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A PENALTY U/S 221 SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED FOR NON PAYMENT OF TAXES. IN THIS CONNECTION AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WAS ACCORDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR ON 22 - 5 - 2012 WITHOUT FALL AND OFFER ITS EXPLANATION IF ANY. THE COMPANY HAS HOWEVER ONCE AGAIN PREFERRED NOT TO AVAIL THIS OPPORTUNITY ALSO AND HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED NOR HAS IT GIVEN ANY REPRESEN TATION. HENCE IT IS NOW FAIRLY CONSTRUED THAT THE COMPANY HAS NO EXPLANATION WHATSOEVER TO OFFER FOR ITS NON PAYMENT OF TAXES. I AM OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 221 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961. ACCORDINGLY I LEVY 7 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 A PENALT Y OF RS.1 00 000/ - U/S 221 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961. THIS. PENALTY AMOUNT SHOULD BE PAID AS PER THE DEMAND NOTICE ENCLOSED. FROM THE ABOVE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED OPPORTUNITY BY TH E REVENUE AUTHORITIES BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ENJOY THE FACILITIES. WE OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.1 17 83 190. THEREFORE HE WAS REQUIRED TO PAY ADVANCE TAX AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT THE AS SESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS FOR WHOLE YEAR AND HE WAS AWARE OF THE BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY HIM OF DAY TO DAY ACTIVITIES EVEN IF HE DID NOT PAY THE ADVANCE TAX. HE SHOULD PAY THE TAXES ALONG WITH INTEREST WHEN HE FILED RETURN OF INCOME. BUT THE ASS ESSEE DID NOT COMPLY THE PROVISIONS OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS IN FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT WHEREAS THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE WHOLE YEAR AND RETURN OF INCOME HAVING BEEN FILED MUCH AFTER THE END OF THE YEAR. 8 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 BUT THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN FUND AVAILABILITY POSITION ON THE DUE DATE OF PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX AS WELL AS ON THE DATE OF SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX I.E. DATE OF FILING OF RETURN. WE ALSO OBSERVE FORM THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S. 144 BY REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE WHIC H CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE FOR THE PAYMENT OF TAX. IT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PAYING THE TAXES WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME. HENCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY IMPOSED THE PENAL TY U/S. 221(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AFTER CONSIDERING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN DEFAULT FOR PAYMENT OF TAX. WE DID NOT FIND ANY SUBSTANCE ON THE SUBMISSION OF THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE. THE CASE LAWS (SUPRA) RELIED ON BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESE NTATIVE ARE DISTINGUISHABLE ON THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ON HAND. AS PER OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING 9 ITA NO. 1 828 /HYD/2019 OFFICER FOR IMPOSING PENALTY U/S. 221(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 4. IN THE RESUL T - THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24TH MAY 2021. SD/ - SD/ - ( S.S. GODARA ) ( LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD DT. 24 .05 .2021. * REDDY GP COPY TO : 1. M/S. SPR INFRASTRUCTURE (INDIA) LIMITED 8 - 2 - 293/82/A22 SOURYA SOUDHA PLOT 22 ROAD NO.5 JUBILEE HILLS HYDERABAD - 500 033 2. A CIT CIRCLE 3 ( 2 ) HYDERABAD. 3. PR. CIT - 3 HYDERABAD. 4. C I T(APPEALS) - 3 HYDERABAD. 5 . DR ITAT HYDERABAD. 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SR. PVT. SECRETARY ITAT HYDERABAD.