Income Tax

Explanation of assessee though rejected in assessment, accepted by ITAT in penalty proceedings

Assessee’s explanation may not be sufficient for deleting addition on merit, however, in penalty proceedings it deserves to be accepted – ITAT deletes concealment penalty imposed for addition made due to unserved summons on debtors

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2591 (2018) (10) ITAT

The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A) in upholding the imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The assessee was required by the Assessing Officer (AO) to explain the cash deposits in his bank account.

The assessee explained that the deposits were made out of payment received from the debtors of his old business of commission agent.

The AO issued summons to 13 debtors at the address given by the assessee. However in 6 cases, these returned unserved. Consequently, the AO made the addition in view of the fact that the said 6 parties were not produced by the assessee.

In the penalty proceedings, the assessee offered the same explanation which was made in the assessment proceedings. The assessee as submitted that the debtors were farmers and they were dealing with him when he was running commission business. The payments were actually received from them which were outstanding since long. However, those debtors denied to have made these payments just to avoid enquiries by the Income Tax Department of the source of these payments.

The Tribunal noted that the said explanation was found to be not tenable leading to the addition which was sustained by the CIT(A) also.

The Tribunal opined that the explanation of the assessee may not be sufficient for deleting the addition on merit, however, as far as the penalty proceedings are concerned, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the assessee had explained that these farmers have avoided being present being reluctant to come before the AO and face questions and thus, he had not been able to persuade them.

Accordingly, the Tribunal considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, opined that the said explanation deserved to be accepted and the penalty was directed to be deleted.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Refund can not be denied on the ground that it was claimed in a return filed u/s 148 – ITAT

Refund can not be denied on the ground that it was claimed in a return filed u/s 148 where no…

18 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Distinction between religious & charitable purposes is determined by institution’s primary or dominant object

The distinction between religious and charitable purposes is determined by institution's primary or dominant object and not merely by presence…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Fit case to issue notice u/s 148 – Relevancy of material & application of mind to objections important

For determination of what constitutes a fit case to issue notice u/s 148, rule of relevancy of the material and…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

AO is under an obligation to assign reasons for rejecting explanation of the assessee

AO is under an obligation to duly consider the explanation furnished by the assessee and assign reasons for rejecting the…

3 days ago
  • Excise/Custom

CBIC issues SoP for clearance of imported goods through Foreign Post Offices

CBIC issues SoP for clearance of imported goods through Foreign Post Offices under Postal Import Regulations, 2025.  Standard Operating Procedure…

3 days ago
  • civil-law

Sale deed executed with full knowledge of only part consideration paid, not void – SC

Sale deed executed with full knowledge of only part consideration paid, cannot be rendered void or inoperative merely for non…

3 days ago