Mirza International Ltd, Kanpur vs Assessee

M/s Mirza International Ltd., Vs A.C.I.T.-6, 14/6, Civil Lines, Kanpur. Kanpur. PAN:AAECM3626M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by None Respondent by Smt. Swati Ratna, D. R. Date of hearing 23/06/2015 Date of pronouncement 30/06/2015

ORDER

PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.

This is an assessee's appeal directed against the order passed by learned CIT(A)-II, Kanpur dated 03/12/2013 for the assessment year 2009- 2010.

2. The assessee has raised as many as six grounds but the only grievance of the assessee is regarding confirming the penalty of Rs.5,95,000/- imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee on the appointed date of hearing in spite of notice and hence, we proceed to decide this appeal of the assessee ex-parte qua the assessee.

4. Learned D.R. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below.

2 5. We have considered the submissions of Learned D.R. of the Revenue, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the issue in dispute was decided by learned CIT(A) as per para 3 of his order, which is reproduced below for the sake of ready reference:-

"3. The AO has levied penalty of Rs.5,95,000/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and thereby, for concealment of income. The AO has observed that the assessee Company has been following the mercantile system of accounting, thereby, the income accrued needs to be treated as income for the year. Accordingly, the assessee should have accounted the receipt of Rs.2,64,000/- as income of the year on accrual basis which has not been done by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee's contention that though the income pertains to the A.Y. 2009-10, but since the cheque was received in A.Y. 2010-11, the same was not included in the current year's income has not been accepted by the AO. The amount of Rs.1,84,222/- being the unreconciled credit entry on the basis of TDS entry as per Form No.26AS also forms the part of the concealed income of the assessee. Further, Rs.14,67,801/- has been debited during the year and thereby, the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars which has led to the concealment of income to the extent of Rs.14,67,801/-. Accordingly, the AO has levied minimum penalty of Rs.5,95,000/- on above discussed three incomes on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars, thereby, concealment of income.

I have considered the submissions and the arguments placed by the A.R. of the assessee along with the contents of the assessment order. It is true that the assessee has been following the mercantile system of accounting, thereby, the income accrued during the year should have been made part of computation of income for the year, Accordingly, the rental of Rs.2,64,000/- should have been offered in A.Y. 2009-10 only. Further, Rs.1,84,222/- is the assessee's income as per the reconciliation of Form No.26AS.

3 The assessee has wrongly debited Rs.14,67,801/- during the year for the Hapur land account which is not true. Accordingly, the AO has rightly levied penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing of inaccurate particulars, thereby, concealment of income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MAK Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 38 Taxmann.com 448 SC 2013 has laid down in para no.9 that "It is the statutory duty of the assessee to record all its transactions in the books of account, to explain the source of payment made by it and to declare its true income in return of income filed from year to year. Voluntary disclosure of his concealed income does not absolve the assessee from levying of penalty. Therefore, the penalty of Rs.5,95,000/- levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is hereby confirmed."

6. As per above Para from the order of CIT(A), we find that all the aspects of the matter have been properly examined by learned CIT(A) and we do not find any infirmity therein. Hence, we decline to interfere in the order of learned CIT(A).

7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page)

Sd/. Sd/.

(SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) Judicial Member Accountant Member

Dated:30/06/2015 *C.L.Singh

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1.The Appellant 2.The Respondent. 3.Concerned CIT 4.The CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Asstt. Registrar