Sudha Matika, Hyd, Hyderabad v. ITO, Circle-4(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 860/HYD/2017 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 86022514 RSA 2017
Assessee PAN AGOPM7250L
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 860/HYD/2017
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Sudha Matika, Hyd, Hyderabad
Respondent ITO, Circle-4(1), Hyd, Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 23-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags penalty u/s 271(1)(c)
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 23-11-2017
Last Hearing Date 23-11-2017
First Hearing Date 23-11-2017
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 18-05-2017
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B SMC : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN VICE PRESIDENT ITA.NOS.860 & 861/HYD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 2007 SMT. M. SUDHA DOMALGUDA HYDERABAD. PAN: AGOPM 7250 L VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE - 4(1) I.T. TOWERS A.C. GUARDS HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE: SHRI KIRAN FOR S. RAMA RAO FOR REVENUE : SMT. N. SWAPNA DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.11.2017 ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN VP. BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEY PERTAIN TO A.Y. 2006 - 2007. IN BOTH THE APPEALS THE MAIN GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSE SSEE. AS COULD BE NOTICED FROM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) THE CASE WAS POSTED FROM TIME TO TIME RIGHT FROM 2015 AND NOTICE S W ERE SENT BY REGISTERED POST WHICH W ERE RETURNED BACK WITH THE REMARK THAT NO SUCH PERSON FOUND AT THE PREMISES. UNDER THESE CIRCU MSTANCES LD. CIT(A) HAD NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEALS ON MERITS. EVEN BEFORE ME NO MATERIAL WAS PLACED TO INDICATE THAT THERE IS EITHER CHANGE IN ADDRESS OR THERE WERE GENUINE REASONS FOR NOT RECEIVING THE NOTICES FROM 20 15 TO 201 7 . UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DISPOSING OF THE APPEALS EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 2 2. ON MERITS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT ONLY PEAK CREDIT WAS ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH CANNOT BE TREATED AS CONCEALED INCOME SO AS TO LEVY PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE SAME ASPECT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN QUANTUM PROCEEDINGS AND OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT IDENTIFY THE DEPOSITS W HICH BELONG TO HER HUSBAND AND THEREFORE IT WAS A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY. EVEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL NO MATERIAL WAS PLACED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE. SIMILARLY WITH REGARD TO LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS. 10 000/ - U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT THE CASE OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS THAT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE NOTICES ISSUED U/SS 14 3 ( 2 ) AND 142(1) OF THE ACT. IN FACT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 OF THE ACT. EVEN IN RESPECT OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 2 7 1 ( B ) OF THE ACT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES PENALTY OF RS. 10 000/ - WAS LEVIED WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN AT THIS STAGE. SINCE THE FINDI NGS OF A.O. AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) COULD NOT BE CONTROVERTED BY THE ASSESSEE EVEN AT THIS STAGE I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THEREFORE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD NOVEMBER 2017. S D / - (D. MANMOHAN) VICE PRESIDENT HYDERABAD DATED: 23 RD NOVEMBER 2017 OKK SR.PS 3 COPY TO 1. M. SUDHA 1 - 2 - 365/20/E FG - 2 HAPPY HOME APARTMENTS GAGAN MAHAL DOMALGUDA HYDERABAD 500 029. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE - 4(1) I.T. TOWERS A.C. GUARDS HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (A) - 3 HYDERABAD. 4. PR. CIT - 1 HYDERABAD. 5. DR ITAT HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE