Itta/618/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. M Jaganmohan Reddy

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRAPRADESH PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A. NO.618 OF 2014 DATED:8.10.2014 Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax-IVHyderabad … Appellant And M. Jaganmohan Reddy … Respondent THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A. NO.618 OF 2014 JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be preferred against the judgment andorder of the learned Tribunal dt.23.2.2007 on the following suggestedquestion of law: “Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal wascorrect in law in setting aside the order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IncomeTax Act?” We have heard Sri J.V. Prasad, learned counsel appearing forthe appellant – Revenue, and gone through the impugned judgment ofthe learned Tribunal. It appears that the learned Tribunal on fact found that pre-condition for initiation of penalty proceedings are not satisfied. It wasrecorded as follows: “Unless and until there is concealment of income or the assesseefurnished inaccurate particulars, the A.O. cannot levy penalty under Section271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.” We are in full agreement with the aforesaid reasoning. Thelearned Tribunal thereafter on fact found as follows: “It is not in dispute that the assessee has furnished the full particularsand details of the creditors including the confirmation letters and alsoexpressed his inability to produce the creditors. Therefore, in our opinion, theA.O. should have summoned the creditors for examination under Section131 of the Income Tax Act. Without the A.O. making any furtherinvestigation, we cannot presume any concealment on the part of theassessee.” Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which isreproduced hereunder would also provides to the same effect.“Failure to furnish returns, comply with notices, concealment of income, etc. 271(1). If the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) orthe Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in the course of anyproceedings under this Act, is satisfied that any person – (a)… … … (b)… … … (c)has concealed the particulars of his income or furnishedinaccurate particulars of such income, or …” Therefore, we dismiss this appeal. There will be no order as tocosts. ________________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _______________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 8.10.2014 bnr