Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai

Goutham Chand Mehta (Huf), Chennai vs Ito Non Corporate Ward 1 (2), Chennai on 1 April, 2019

              आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'डी'  यायपीठ, चे नई

                IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                         'D' BENCH, CHENNAI
 ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन,  या यक सद य एवं  ी इंटूर रामा राव, लेखा सद य केसम&

        BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
           SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1723/Chny/2018
                  नधा)रण वष) /Assessment Year : 2014-15

Gouthamchand Mehta (HUF),
C/o L. Nahata & Co.,                     The Income Tax Officer,
120, Nyniappa Naicken Street,     v.     Non-Corporate Ward 1(2),
Parktown, Chennai - 600 003.             Chennai - 600 034.

PAN : AADHG 0413 J
       (अपीलाथ-/Appellant)                    (./यथ-/Respondent)

 अपीलाथ- क0 ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Lakshmichand Nahata, FCA
 ./यथ- क0 ओर से/Respondent by :     Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT

       सन
        ु वाई क0 तार ख/Date of Hearing          : 14.03.2019
       घोषणा क0 तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 01.04.2019


                             आदे श /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -2, Chennai, dated 20.02.2018 and pertains to assessment year 2014-15.

2. There is a delay of 14 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. After hearing both the parties, this Tribunal finds that there is a reasonable cause in not filing the appeal within the 2 I.T.A. No.1723/Chny/18 prescribed time. Therefore, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

3. Coming to the merit of the appeal, the Assessing Officer levied penalty on the donation said to be made by the assessee to School of Human Genetics and Population Health to the extent of ₹4,38,750/-. The assessee claimed deduction under Section 35CA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). During the course of search operation in the premises of the School of Human Genetics and Population Health, a sworn statement appears to have been recorded and it was found that the receipt of donation by the assessee was not genuine. The assessee during the course of assessment proceeding withdrew the claim made under Section 35CA of the Act and offered for taxation the entire amount of ₹4,38,750/-.

4. The Assessing Officer has also disallowed a sum of ₹3,51,000/- which was debited in the Profit & Loss account towards donation. The question arises for consideration is whether the assessee has concealed any part of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income? The fact that the entire income was disclosed by the assessee is not in dispute. The assessee debited 3 I.T.A. No.1723/Chny/18 ₹3,51,000/- towards donation and also made a claim with regard to the amount given to School of Human Genetics and Population Health to the extent of ₹4,38,750/-. When the assessee has disclosed entire particulars of income before the Assessing Officer and made a claim under Section 35CA of the Act and during the course of hearing, the assessee offered the income and withdrew the claim, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that it cannot be said that there is a concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

5. The statement said to be recorded from the trustees of School of Human Genetics and Population Health was not furnished to the assessee. Moreover, as held by Apex Court in CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158, mere making a claim cannot be construed to be concealing of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case for levy of penalty. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities are set aside and penalty levied by the Assessing Officer is deleted.

6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 4 I.T.A. No.1723/Chny/18

Order pronounced in the court on 1st April, 2019 at Chennai.

               sd/-                                      sd/-
       (इंटूर रामा राव)                         (एन.आर.एस. गणेशन)
    (Inturi Rama Rao)                            (N.R.S. Ganesan)
लेखा सद य/Accountant Member               या यक सद य/Judicial Member
चे नई/Chennai,
                     st
7दनांक/Dated, the 1 April, 2019.
Kri.


आदे श क0 . त8ल9प अ:े9षत/Copy to:
 1. अपीलाथ-/Appellant              2. ./यथ-/Respondent
 3. आयकर आय;    ु त (अपील)/CIT(A)-2, Chennai-34
 4. Principal CIT, Chennai-1, Chennai
 5. 9वभागीय . त न ध/DR            6. गाड) फाईल/GF.