DCIT, CHENNAI v. Dr.R.Gopalakrishnan, CHENNAI

ITA 855/CHNY/2010 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 85521714 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAEPG7001P
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 855/CHNY/2010
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, CHENNAI
Respondent Dr.R.Gopalakrishnan, CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 18-08-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 03-06-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: C ENCH;CHENNA I (BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAN P GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO. 853 TO 856/MDS/2010 ASST. YEARS 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 & 2004 -05 THE DCIT VS. DR. R.GOPALAKRISHNAN BUSINESS CIRCLE I CHENNAI NO.25 V MAIN RD R.A. PURAM CHENNAI 600028 (PAN AAEPG7001P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI B. SRINIVASAN RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.SRIDHAR ORDER PER ABRAHAM P.GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER- IN ALL THESE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ITS GRIEVANCE IS THAT THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE A.O FOR THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEA RS ON THE ASSESSEE UNDER SEC. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 ( THE ACT FOR SHORT) WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). 2. WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT SIMILAR LEVY OF PENALTY IN THE ASS ESSEES CASE FOR ITA NOS. 853 TO 856/MDS/2010 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WAS DELETED BY THIS TRIBUNA L VIDE ORDER DATED 4-12-2009 IN ITA NO.203/MDS/09. LD. COUNSEL ALSO PL ACED ON RECORD THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN A N APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL FOR ASST. YEAR 2005-06 WHEREIN SUCH APPEAL WAS DISMISSED. 3. PER CONTRA LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT FOR ASST. YEA R 2005-06 ASSESSEE HAD FILED REVISED RETURN WITHIN THE PERIOD ALLOWED U/S 139(5) OF THE ACT WHEREAS FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS SUCH REVI SED RETURNS WERE FILED AFTER THE PERIOD MENTIONED THEREIN. BUT FOR T HAT HE WAS FAIR ENOUGH TO ADMIT THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE WERE SIM ILAR TO THAT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2005-06. IN REPLY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON RECORD THE DECISION DATED 02-07-2010 OF THIS TR IBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ANOTHER ASSESSEE CALLED DR. MADAN MOHAN REDDY IN IT A NOS.132 TO 136/MDS/2010 WHERE SIMILAR LEVY OF PENALTY WAS DELE TED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE RIVAL C ONTENTIONS. ASSESSEE WAS AN ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON WORKING AS A CON SULTANT WITH APOLLO HOSPITALS CHENNAI. THERE WERE CERTAIN INVES TIGATIONS MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THE SAID HOSPITAL WHEREIN IT CAME TO LIGHT THAT THE ITA NOS. 853 TO 856/MDS/2010 3 SAID HOSPITAL HAD MADE CASH PAYMENTS TO VARIOUS DOC TORS INCLUDING THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER BEFORE ANY PROCEEDINGS WERE IN ITIATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE HE HAD FILED REVISED RETURNS FOR THE RES PECTIVE ASST. YEARS. NO DOUBT IT IS TRUE THAT THE REVISED RETURNS FILED FO R THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS WERE AFTER THE TIME PERIOD MENTION ED IN SEC. 139(5) OF THE ACT. BUT NEVERTHELESS AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD . AR SUCH REVISED RETURNS WERE REGULARIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT BY ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT ON 14-3-2008 AND SUCH RETURNS FILED WERE AC CEPTED AND ASSESSMENT COMPLETED WITHOUT MAKING ANY FURTHER ADD ITION. THEREFORE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT FILING OF REVISED RETUR NS AFTER THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED UNDER SEC. 139(5) OF THE ACT WOULD MAKE NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER HERE. AS HELD BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH COURT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASST. YEAR 2005-06 IN TAX C ASE (APPEAL) NO.520 OF 2010 DATED 5-7-2010 THERE HAS TO BE A SPECIFIC FINDING THAT NON- DISCLOSURE OF INCOME WAS WILLFUL AND DELIBERATE. HE RE THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED REVISED RETURNS FOR ALL THE IMPUGNED ASSESSME NT YEARS THOUGH AFTER THE TIME PRESCRIBED BEFORE INITIATION OF ANY PROCE EDINGS AGAINST HIM. WE ALSO FIND THAT IN THE CASE OF DR. MADAN MOHAN RE DDY IN SIMILAR SITUATION THE TRIBUNAL HAD DELETED THE LEVY OF PEN ALTY IN ITA NOS.132 TO136/MDS/2010 DATED 2-7-2010. THUS IN OUR OPINION THE CIT(A) WAS ITA NOS. 853 TO 856/MDS/2010 4 WELL JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE PENALTY LEVIED ON TH E ASSESSEE FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS. NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLE D FOR. 5. IN THE RESULT APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISM ISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 18 -08-2010. . SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER CHENNAI: 18TH AUGUST 2010 NBR CC:THE ASSESSEE 2)THE ASSESSING OFFICER 4)THE CIT (A) 4) THE CIT 5)THE D.R 6)GUARD FILE.