Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Indore
Shri Ravi A.S. Satnam Singh Saluja, ... vs The Ito, Indore on 28 February, 2018
Ravi A S Satnam
ITA 361/Ind/2010
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before Shri Kul Bharat, Hon'ble Judicial Member and
Shri Manish Borad, Hon'ble Accountant Member
ITA No. 361/Ind/2010
A.Y. 2005-06
Ravi A.S. Satnam Singh Saluja
Indore ::: Appellant
Vs.
Incometax Officer 5(1)
Indore ::: Respondent
Appellant by Shri Ashish Goyal and
Shri N.D. Patwa
Respondent by Shri Rajiv Jain
Date of hearing 27.2.2018
Date of pronouncement 28.2.2018
O R D E R
PER SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM
This appeal of the assessee relating to the assessment year 202005-06 is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Indore dated 26.2.2010 which is arising out of the order u/s 271(1)c) of 1 Ravi A S Satnam ITA 361/Ind/2010 the Act dated 26.6.2009 framed by the ITO, Ward 5(1), Indore.
2. The sole grievance of the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirming the penalty of Rs. 1,87,837/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income. Briefly stated, the facts, as culled out from record, are that the assessment u/s 147 read with section 148 of the Act was completed on 31.12.2008 in the case of the assessee who is an Individual thereby assessing the income at Rs. 7,00,510/- as against the income shown by the assessee at Rs. 1,08,210/-. One of the additions was of Rs. 5,26,976/- relating to unexplained cash deposit in the saving bank account held with State Bank of India. Penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and an amount of Rs. 1,87,837/- was calculated as penalty @ 100% of tax leviable on the concealed income of Rs.5,92,303/- (unexplained cash 2 Ravi A S Satnam ITA 361/Ind/2010 Rs.5,26,976/- & gross profit Rs.65,326/- on undisclosed sales.
3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against penalty imposed but failed to succeed. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. .
4. During the course of hearing, it was inquired by the Bench about the status of quantum addition to which the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue of quantum addition is pending for adjudication before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the outcome is awaited. The learned DR also confirmed the information given by the learned counsel for the assessee.
5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The assessee is in appeal challenging the finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax 3 Ravi A S Satnam ITA 361/Ind/2010 (Appeals) confirming the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act at Rs. 1,87,837/-. We find that the issue of quantum addition relating to unexplained cash deposited and the addition of gross profit on undisclosed sales is still pending for adjudication before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The fate of penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act depends a lot on the finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on the quantum additions. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the issue of penalty should also be set aside to the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). We accordingly direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to de novo adjudicate the issue of penalty along with quantum issue. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of being heard be provided to the assessee.
6. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
4 Ravi A S Satnam ITA 361/Ind/2010 Pronounced in open Court on 28 February, 2018.
Sd sd
(KUL BHARAT) (MANISH BORAD)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
28th February, 2018
Dn/-
Copy to - Appellant/Respodent/Pr.CIT/CIT(A)/DR/Guard File 5