Parama Basak v. Commissioner of I.Tax - V, Calcutta - 2015-LL-0319-19

Citation	2015-LL-0319-19
Appellant Name	Parama Basak
Respondent Name	Commissioner of I.Tax - V, Calcutta
Court	HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	19/03/2015
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	written off • bad debt
Bot Summary:	The question of law formulated at the time of admission of the appeal reads as follows :- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal s order was perverse one in so far as in absence of any findings that the debts were not genuine, or that any of the assessee s Explanation was false or that the assessee ever failed to furnish any particular material to the computation of the income, the same would become the basis for imposing penalty. 2 The penalty proceedings were started and approved by the impugned judgment and order on the basis that the claim made by the assessee on account of bad debt was not allowed. Before initiating the penal proceedings the Assessing Officer is required to be satisfied as to whether any income has been concealed or any inadequate particulars have been furnished. Mr. Sen, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the order under challenge passed by the Assessing Officer does not show any such satisfaction nor the learned Tribunal had considered the matter in that perspective. The order of the CIT has been passed mechanically and without applying mind. The learned Advocate appearing for the respondent did not seriously try to support the order under challenge. We have no doubt in our mind that the order suffers from perversity of the highest order.

IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) Original Side Present : Hon ble Justice Girish Chandra Gupta And Hon ble Justice Arindam Sinha 19th March, 2015 ITA 155 of 2003 Smt. Parama Basak Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax V, Calcutta Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate with Mr. Biswajit Pal, Advocate for appellant Ms. Mamta Bhargav, Advocate for respondent Court :- subject matter of challenge in this appeal is judgment and order dated 14th January, 2003 passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal pertaining to Assessment Year 1991-92 dismissing appeal preferred by assessee. assessee has come up. question of law formulated at time of admission of appeal reads as follows :- Whether on facts and in circumstances of case Tribunal s order was perverse one in so far as in absence of any findings that debts were not genuine, or that any of assessee s Explanation was false or that assessee ever failed to furnish any particular material to computation of income, same would become basis for imposing penalty. 2 penalty proceedings were started and approved by impugned judgment and order on basis that claim made by assessee on account of bad debt was not allowed. It is not in dispute that amount of debt had duly been written off by assessee; why was same not allowed is however mystery to us but be that as it may, fact remains that claim for bad debt after debt had been written off could never be ground for initiating penal proceedings. Before initiating penal proceedings Assessing Officer is required to be satisfied as to whether any income has been concealed or any inadequate particulars have been furnished. Mr. Sen, learned Advocate appearing for appellant submitted that order under challenge passed by Assessing Officer does not show any such satisfaction nor learned Tribunal had considered matter in that perspective. order of CIT has been passed mechanically and without applying mind. learned Advocate appearing for respondent did not seriously try to support order under challenge. We have no doubt in our mind that order suffers from perversity of highest order. order under challenge is set aside. question as framed is answered in affirmative. appeal is thus disposed of. (Girish Chandra Gupta, J.) (Arindam Sinha, J.) ANC Parama Basak v. Commissioner of I.Tax - V, Calcutta

Metadata

Judgment