Itta v. The Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax

HIGH COURT FOR AT HYDERABAO WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH TWO THOUSAND AND PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI [JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY], ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI [JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI] INCOME TAX TRIBU NAL [L NO: ][22 ] [2024] lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal [filed ][under Section 260-A ][of ][the ][lncome Tax ][Act,]1961 against the order [daled ][27.12.2023 passed ][in ] [No.609/Hydl2023 on ][the ][file]of the lncome Tax Appellate [Tribunal, ][Hyderabad Benches, "SMC", Hyderabad, ][for]assessment Year 2017-18 [preferred against ][the ][order ][dated 04.12.2023 passed ][in]Appeal No. NFAC/2016-1 [7 ][t10176162 ][on the ][file ][of ][the commissioner ][of ][the ][lncome]Tax/ (Appeals), National [Faceless Appeal ][centre ][(NFAC), Delhi preferred ][against]the order dated 28.09.2022 [passed in PAN/GIR No. ][on ][the ][file ][of ][the]lncome Tax Department Between: Damodar Rao Bibinagar, [S/o ][Bramachary ][Bibinagar Age-d ][qb-9.ul ].69.years,Occ: Retired Employee R/o [H.No ][1-8-74l6,Chikkadapally']Hyderabad,Telangana-500020. ...APPELLANT AND The Additional Commissioner [of lncome-tax, Hyderabad] ...RESPONDENT l.A. NO: 2OF 2024 Petition under section 15'l of [cPC ][praying ][that ][in ][the circumstances ][stated]in the affidavit filed in support of the [petition, ][the ][High ][Court ][may ][be ][pleased ][to]direct the Respondents not take any [coercive ][steps ][pursuant ][to ][Penalty]proceedings initiated Uts 271D for an [amount ]of [Rs.13,10,0001 ][vide ][order]dt.28logl2o22 pending adjudication [of ][the ][present Appeal.] Gounsel for the Appellant : Sri Siripuram Keshava Counsel for the Respondent : - The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT 7 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE [N.TUKARAMJI]INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL A [No.22 ][of ][2024] JUDGMENT (per Hon'ble Sri Justi.e P'SAM KOSHY) Heard Mr. Siripuram [Keshava, ][learned counsel ][for ][the] assessee.appellant/ 2. The instant is an appeal under [Section ][260A ][of ][the ][Income] Tax Act, 1961 (for short the [Act') ][preferred ][by ][the ][assessee]assailing the order [passed ]by the [Income ][Tax ][Appellate ][Tribunal](herein referred to as 'the Tribunal') in [I.T.A.No.609 ]lHydl2023 [otr]27.12.2023 for the assessment [year ][2Ol7-18.] 3, Vide the impugned order, the [Tribunal has ][dismissed ][the]appeal preferred by the assessee [confirming ][the ][order ][passed ][by]the Commissioner of Income [Tax ][(Appeais) ][as ][also ][the ][order ][passed]by the Assessment Offrcer so [far ][as ][the ][penalty ][under ][Section ][27lD]of the Act is concerned. Learned counsel for for the [[appellant ][contendcd ]][[contendcd ]][[that ][the]][[the]] 4. Learned counsel for for the [[appellant ][contendcd ]][[contendcd ]][[that ][the]][[the]]authorities concerned [have ][not ][complied ][with the ][provisions ][of]Section 27 39 of the Act [which ][provides for ][certain ][immunity ][to ][the]taxpayer. 5. Perusal of the records would show that admittedly theassessee has been issued with a show-cause notice under Section274 of the Act which in fact is the procedure prescribed under thestatute required to be initiated before the order of penalty isfinalized' In spite of the admitted fact that the show-cause noticewas issued under Section2T4 of the Act to the assessee, there doesnot seem to have been any written reply provided by the assesseeto the said shor.l,-cause notice and in the process, the authoritiesconcerned have invoked provision of Section 2ZtD of the Actimposing penalty upon the assessee for having paid an amount ofRs. 13,1O,00O /- by way of cash in the process of selling of hisproperty for a sale consideration of Rs.Sg, lO,00O/-. 5. Perusal of the records would show that admittedly theassessee has been issued with a show-cause notice under Section274 of the Act which in fact is the procedure prescribed under thestatute required to be initiated before the order of penalty isfinalized' In spite of the admitted fact that the show-cause noticewas issued under Section2T4 of the Act to the assessee, there doesnot seem to have been any written reply provided by the assesseeto the said shor.l,-cause notice and in the process, the authoritiesconcerned have invoked provision of Section 2ZtD of the Actimposing penalty upon the assessee for having paid an amount ofRs. 13,1O,00O /- by way of cash in the process of selling of hisproperty for a sale consideration of Rs.Sg, lO,00O/-. 6. If we rook into the provisions of Section 269sS of the Act, ithas been statutorily mandated that there sha_ll not be any cashtransactions in excess of Rs.20,OO0/_. The very same statute underSection 27lD also prescribes that in the event if there is violationof the requirement under Section 26955 of the Act, the concernedperson would be liable for a penalty under Section 2TlD ofthe Act.It is these verv provisions whichhave been invoked by therespondent authorities. 7. So far as the contention of the learned counsel for theappellant that the provision of Section 27 3B of the Act has not been complied with, the said contention does not have much forcefor the simple reasonthat the assessee himself admits to havereceived the notice under Section 224 and that is envisaged underSection 2738 of the Act which requires an opportunity of hearingbeforePassing aI order of penalty. 8. In view of the same, view of the same, the same, same, we do not find any merits in the appealnot find any merits in the appealfind any merits in the appealin the appealthe appealappealpreferred by the assessee much Iess a substantia-l question of Iawmade out as is required under Section 260A of the Act. In view of the same, view of the same, the same, same, we do not find any merits in the appealnot find any merits in the appealfind any merits in the appealin the appealthe appealappeal 9. The appeal thus fails and is accordingly dismissed. fails and is accordingly dismissed. and is accordingly dismissed. is accordingly dismissed. accordingly dismissed. However,there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneousapplications pending if arly, shall stand closed. The appeal thus fails and is accordingly dismissed. fails and is accordingly dismissed. and is accordingly dismissed. is accordingly dismissed. accordingly dismissed. However,However, Sd/- M. VIJAYA BHASJOINT REGISR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Benches, ["St\4C", ][Hyderabad.]2. The Commissioner of the lncome [Tax/ (Appeals), ][National Faceless ][Appeal]Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 3. The 4. One CC to Sri Siripuram Keshava, [Advocate ][OPUC,]5. Two CD Copies Njbd HIGH DATED: [0610312024] JUDGMENT lTTA.No'22 [of ][2024] DISMISSING WITHOUT d,,.,I'th,y,= 1vl [sTAret]e/.tf,zJ,.)?.?- [2.Uq]o.,tr+*to oEs PATC