TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 258
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....levied by the AO on account of the fact that cash deposits of Rs. 20,00,000/- in the SB account of the assessee was treated by the AO as unexplained income and even in the penalty proceedings no explanation was filed with regard to the same. For the same reason the learned CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. 5. before the Tribunal the learned counsel for the assessee raised a three pronged legal argument, i.e.: (a) The assessee is being assessed to tax at Thane from year to year under PAN ACKPP1438M in which event the jurisdiction to make an assessment lies with the ITO, Ward 4(3), Thane whereas the assessment was made by the ITO (HQ) (CIB), Pune which is void abinito. He has referred to page 1 onwards of the paper book to highlight that the assessee filed her returns of income from year to year before ITO, Thane and the assessments have been made accordingly. In his opinion it is the duty of the ITO (HQ) (CIB), Pune, even if the assessee is non-cooperative, to find out as to whether the assessee has been assessed to tax at any other place and to transfer the file to enable such AO to complete the assessment as otherwise the assessment becomes void and conse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ten thousand rupees; (b) by the Assistant Commissioner [or Deputy Commissioner], where the penalty exceeds twenty thousand rupees, except with the prior approval of the [Joint] Commissioner." In the in instant case the penalty was levied on 24.04.2009 whereas in para 6 of the penalty order it is clearly mentioned that approval of the Addl. CIT was obtained vide letter dated 28.04.2009. 6. On the other hand, the learned D.R. objected to the technical grounds by contending that the assessment was made under section 144 of the Act. There is no way for the AO to know as to whether the assessee was assessed to tax at any other place, which can be noticed from the fact that even in the assessment order the address is mentioned as "3267, Bundle No. 7, Individual" which can only be done when address is not known. Such cases are covered by the provisions of section 292(B) of the Act. He also submitted that the assessee having filed an appeal before the CIT(A) the AO was of the bona fide opinion that penalty proceedings can be initiated after appropriate order is passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Circular....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....material at this stage, on account of her demise on 03.10.2012, legal heirs requested for one more opportunity by setting aside the matter. At any rate, this being penalty proceedings the explanation furnished above should be treated as correct. The learned counsel for the assessee gave the same explanation for both the years. 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. In so far as A.Y. 2005-06 is concerned, though the assessee has raised three technical grounds we shall first take up the third technical ground, i.e. penalty should be levied with prior approval of the superior authority. In the instant case the order passed under section 271(1)(c) itself shows contradictory facts and no material, whatsoever, was brought on record by Revenue to prove otherwise. Under these circumstances we hold that the AO has not followed the mandatory procedure, prescribed under section 274(2) of the Act, and therefore, penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act deserves to be quashed. We order accordingly. 10. Since the penalty proceedings are quashed in A.Y. 2005-06, it is not necessary to consider the issues on merits as well on the other two technica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cash was to be distributed among the family members and the same was deposited in her account only for safe custody. The AO observed that the cash kept in the said bank account was redeposited and even the interest therefrom was also not offered to tax and therefore the assessee concealed particulars of income. Even before the CIT(A) the assessee reiterated the contentions. The case of the assessee is that after being diagnosed with cancer her father gave the money to the assessee, which has to be amicably distributed amongst the family members but upon the death of her father it became difficult for her to gather the material to prove the source of his money; to buy peace of mind and to avoid litigation the amount was offered to tax. Thus the assessee always cooperated with the Department. Therefore it cannot be treated as a deliberate act or omission on the part of the assessee so as to levy penalty. The learned CIT(A) also rejected the contention of the assessee. Further aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before us. 12. The learned counsel for the assessee relied upon the affidavit filed before us and the explanation given before the AO as well as the CIT(A) to submit that the....