Ita/31/2015 Of M/S.n.j.thomas v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/1ST PHALGUNA, 1936 ITA.No. 31 of 2015 () ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 669/COCH/2013 ofI.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 28.08.2014 (AY-2005-2006) APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT: -------------------------------------------- M/S.N.J.THOMAS & CO., MATTETHARA COLONY, YWCA LANE KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER - SIBY THOMAS. BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.ASOKAN (SR.) SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA SRI.ARUN KUMAR.P RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE I,KOTTAYAM - 673 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL, KOCHI - 682 015. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIONON 20-02-2015, ALONG WITH ITA NO.33/15, THE COURT ON THE SAMEDAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ITA 31/15 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-A :COPY OF THE PENALTY NOTICE ISSUED UNDERSECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. ANNEXURE-B :COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL, KOCHI BENCH IN ITA 237/COCH/2010. ANNEXURE-C :COPY OF PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY R1. ANNEXURE-D :COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IV, KOCHI. ANNEXURE-E :COPY OF ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL IN ITA 669/COCH/2013. //TRUE COPY// jg PA TO JUDGE. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.HARILAL, JJ. ....................................................................ITA Nos.31 & 33 of 2015....................................................................Dated this the 20[th] day of February, 2015. J U D G M E N T Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. 1.We have heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant inthese appeals.these appeals. 2.The issue relates to penalty on the basis of undisputed andindisputable fact that in respect of different transactions, theassessee had not furnished particulars but had concealed relevantparticulars or had furnished inaccurate particulars. As rightlynoted by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the onlycontention of the assessee is that the constructions were withcharitable institutions and they were done without any profit and,therefore, it was not disclosed. That reason cannot be offered fornon-disclosure of relevant particulars and details, which could nothave been concealed. The Tribunal has rightly noted that theremay be profit or loss but still the assessee is expected to disclose ITA31&33/15 all the material factors before the assessing authority. Thepenalty order has found its approval at the hands of the superiorstatutory authorities and ultimately the Tribunal. We do not findour way to hold that the impugned order calls for interference.These appeals, therefore, fail. In the result, these appeals are dismissed in limine. (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) jg (K.HARILAL, JUDGE)