TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 729
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Assessment Year Assessment Order Penalty Order CIT(A)'s Order 1. 29/CTK/14 Md. Mofazzalur Rahman 2008-2009 22.12.2010 30.06.2011 15.11.2013 2. 30/CTK/14 Md. Mofazzalur Rahman 2009-2010 22.12.2010 30.06.2011 15.11.2013 3. 575/CTK/13 F.Serajuddin Exports (P) Ltd. 2008-2009 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 24.10.2013 4. 576/CTK/13 F.Serajuddin Exports (P) Ltd. 2009-2010 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 24.10.2013 5. 577/CTK/13 Serajuddin & Co.(P) Ltd 2008-2009 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 25.10.2013 6. 578/CTK/13 Serajuddin & Co.(P) Ltd 2009-2010 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 25.10.2013 7. 15/CTK/14 Aliza International (P) Ltd. 2009-2010 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 07.11.2013 8. 16/CTK/14 Yazdani International (P) Ltd. 2008-2009 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 05.11.2013 9. 17/CTK/14 Yazdani International (P) Ltd. 2008-2009 29.12.2010 30.06.2011 05.11.2013 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are identical to each other, except different in figure, therefore, with the consent of both the parties, all the appeals are heard analogously and disposed off by this consolidated order. For the sake of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oup. During the course of search operation, various documents, books of account etc. were found and seized. Accordingly, notice u/s.153A(a) of the I T Act, 1961 was issued on 05/03/10 through RPAD, which was duly served upon the assessee but the assessee did not file his return of income for the assessment year 2008-2009 in compliance with the notice. The findings recorded by the AO in the quantum order are as under :- "On 10/03/10 assessee asked for extracts of the seized material and same was provided to the assessee. Further assessee was requested on 29/06/10 to file his return of income, assessee did not turned up. A notice U/s 142(1) alongwith detail questionnaire was send to the assessee on 28/07/10 and date of compliance was fixed on 12/08/10. On said date assessee did not comply with the questionnaire rather he challenged the authority of Joint Director of Income Tax to issue the warrant. Assessee was informed that Joint Director or joint commissioner is also empowered to issue warrant of authorisation by Finance Act (No.2), 2009 with retrospective effect from 01/06/1994; hence, search conducted in your case was legal and assessee was also informed that this matter is t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from various Mutual funds and Insurance policies. Along with that the seized/impounded documents were also used for the assessment. During the course of search and seizure action, Rs. 6.50 crores worth of bank fixed deposits and other investment papers have been seized from the residence of the assessee as they were found not accounted for. The deposits had been made in the name of the assessee and several family members who had no sources of income to speak of. Thus, the entire amount of the investments are sourced from the assessee and hence, the source of the same being unexplained the same are treated as unexplained and concealed income in the hands of the assessee. Addition : Rs. 6,50,00,000/- During the course of search operation it is found that assessee was maintaining a bank account in Bank of India, Jhumpura Branch, Jhumpura, Dist: Keonjhar waith account no. SB-1250. Wide letter no. ACIT/C-l(2)/133(6)/2010-2011/4170 dtd 19/11/10 The branch manager was asked to provide the bank statement of the abovementioned bank account and other details related to the assessee. On 29/11/10, bank forwarded the bank statement alongwith fixed deposit A/c details and interest accrue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... As the assessee failed to furnish a return, he is liable to penalty of Rs. 5,000/- u/s.271F and accordingly, an amount of Rs. 5,000/- is imposed as penalty u/s.271F of the I.T.Act,1961. Issue copy of the order and Demand Notice to the assessee. Sd/- (Tarun Jarwal) Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle.-1(2), Bhubaneswar. 6. Feeling aggrieved from the penalty order, the assessee appealed before the CIT(A) taking various grounds and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-2009 after observing as under :- "4. I have considered the matter carefully. No return of income was filed u/s.139 or in response to notice u/s.l53A(a). As already decided in the quantum appeal vide order dt.07.12.2012 in ITA No.0278/10-11, in the case of the appellant for the AY 2008-09, the AO has proper jurisdiction for issue of notice u/s.l53A(a) and other sections. Further, there has been no deficiency in service of notices. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal preferred against jurisdiction, issue of notices and delay in issue of notice u/s.271F are dismissed. Apart from raising technical issues, the appellant has failed to justify the non-filing of return of income....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... return of income till the completion of assessment. It is clear from the order of assessment that the assessee was provided sufficient opportunities to comply the notice issued by the AO and all the documents were also provided to the assessee which was impounded during the course of search and seizure operations, therefore, the assessee cannot take the shelter of the letters produced before the Bench on 15.03.2010 & 02.08.2010. He also referred to the order of AO in which the AO has clearly mentioned that on 13.08.2010 the complete set of documents which were seized/impounded were provided to the assessee and on 31.08.2010 a letter was also written to the assessee stating that, "if any document is left out please intimate to the office and take the extract." He further submitted that the ld. AO passed the penalty order u/s.271F of the Act within the stipulated time as per Section 275 of the Act for passing of order. Ld. DR further submitted that the AO has rightly passed the order for non-compliance of notice u/s.153A(1)(a) of the Act. Ld. DR further submitted that different penalties have been specified for different mistakes and the assessee has not complied the mandatory provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e dated 02.08.2010 which has been given in case of M/s Seirajuddin & Co. bearing PAN ABIFS 3758 G. The letter has not been furnished by the assessee in the individual capacity and we also noticed difference in dates mentioned in the letter submitted before us regarding notice u/s.142(1) of the Act. The AO has mentioned the date in his order as 28.07.2010 whereas the assessee has shown letter dated 21.07.2010 vide his letter dated 02.08.2010. The assessee was provided the copies of seized materials/documents which were impounded during the search proceedings and the AO also reminded to the assessee as to intimate the office if any documents are left out. But in this regard he could not produce any letter/documents that there is any photocopy of papers or documents are to be taken from the department, meaning thereby a complete set of documents have been provided to the assessee. The assessee should have filed return of income but he did not do so. Even the assessee's total income during the impugned assessment year was more than the threshold limits which is not chargeable to the income tax Act. In view of this also, he should have filed return u/s.139(1) of the Act and their rela....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e clarity, we would like to reproduce the provisions of Section 271F of the Act, which read as under :- [Penalty for failure to furnish return of income. 271F. If a person who is required to furnish a return of his income, as required under sub-section (1) of section 139 or by the provisos to that sub-section, fails to furnish such return before the end of the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer may direct that such person shall pay, by way of penalty, a sum of five thousand rupees:] [Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply to and in relation to the return of income required to be furnished for any assessment year commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 2018.] 12. From the reading of the above provisions of the Act, we are of the opinion that the contention of the assessee that the AO is not empowered to issue notice u/s.153A(1)(a) of the Act and cannot levy penalty u/s.271F of the Act, is not accepted as it is mandatory and no directory. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the case law relied on by the AR of the assessee is not applicable in the present case. We also make it clear that the case law relied on by the AR of....