Tribunal Dismisses Appeals for Non-Prosecution; Upholds Penalty for Suppression of Receipts Due to Lack of Cooperation.

The ITAT dismissed the assessee's appeals for A.Y. 2014-15 and 2016-17 due to non-prosecution, as the assessee failed to attend hearings or provide submissions. Additionally, the ITAT upheld the penalty under sec. 271(1)(c) for suppression of receipts, citing the lack of cooperation and the voluntary disclosure post-search as insufficient to negate the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of active participation in legal proceedings.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against penalty u/sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y. 2014-15 & 2016-17 due to non-prosecution and suppression of receipts.

Issue 1: Non-prosecution
The assessee failed to respond to multiple hearing opportunities given by the ld. CIT(A) and also did not comply with the notices. Despite being provided with several chances, the assessee did not appear or provide any submissions before the Tribunal, indicating a casual approach towards the legal proceedings. The Tribunal found the assessee's behavior evasive and not interested in pursuing the appeals, leading to the dismissal of both appeals on the ground of non-prosecution.

Issue 2: Suppression of Receipts
The assessee admitted to suppressing receipts, as confirmed in the statement recorded u/sec. 132(4) of the Act. No response or explanation was provided during the penalty proceedings, and the assessee failed to respond to hearing notices even before the ld. CIT(A) and the Tribunal. The only defense put forth was declaring the suppressed receipts in the return filed u/sec. 153A of the Act. However, legal precedence established that voluntary disclosure post-search does not absolve the penalty under sec. 271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation 5A. The Tribunal noted that the suppressed receipts would not have been discovered if not for the search action, constituting a clear case of concealment of income. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the levy of penalty u/sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act based on the admitted suppression of receipts and lack of cooperation from the assessee.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the assessee on the grounds of non-prosecution and upheld the penalty u/sec. 271(1)(c) for the suppression of receipts, emphasizing the importance of active participation and compliance in legal proceedings to ensure a fair and just outcome.

---