IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 614/Ind/2014 Assessment Year: 2001-02 Gopal Bhargava Bhopal PAN AIVPB 9378H Appellant Vs ACIT 1(1) Bhopal Respondent Appellant by Sri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D.Patwa Respondent by Shri Mohd. Javed 20.9.2016 Date of hearing 29 .09.2016 Date of pronouncement O R D E R PER SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM assessee has filed present appeal against order of learned CIT(A)-I, Bhopal dated 1.7.2014. Gopal Bhargava ITA No. 614/Ind/2014 2. only ground taken by assessee is that learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming penalty of Rs.70,000/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of Act out of total penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- and allowing relief of Rs.80,000/- only without considering explanation offered by assessee and without considering fact propertly. 3. Brief facts of case are that assessee is Individual deriving income from salary from M.P. Govt. as MLA, income from other sources and income from agriculture. assessee had filed return of income for assessment year 2001-02 on 11.12.2007 declaring total income of Rs.61,553/- and agricultural income of Rs.1,60,000/-. assessee had shown in his return that he was MLA and drawing salary from Govt. of MP and has shown salasry income including allowances. assessee has also claimed exemption u/s 10 of Act for Rs. 60,000/- on account of constituency allowance and telephone allowance. Since this was belated return, to regularise issue, Assessing Officer after recording reasons on basis of information provided in this return, issued notice u/s 148 of Act on 2 Gopal Bhargava ITA No. 614/Ind/2014 27.3.2008. In compliance to notice u/s 148 of Act, assessee submitted that return of income filed on 11.12.2007 may be treated as return in response to notice u/s 148 of Act. Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) during assessment proceedings u/s 147 and asked assessee to furnish details of interest earned by assessee. In response to notice, assessee stated that assessee has shown interest income on estimate basis. However, on getting certificate from concerned bank it was found that interest income was higher than income shown in return. Therefore, revised statement of computation and bank interest of Rs.2,50,480/- as income from other sources as against Rs.25,997/- shown in return of income filed. Assessing Officer after recording submissions of assessee completed assessment u/s 147 read with section 143(3) determining total income at Rs.3,22,040/- and Assessing Officer has not allowed exemption of constituency allowance of Rs. 35,000/- assessee assessee was Minister and not only MLA. Therefore, interest income was 3 Gopal Bhargava ITA No. 614/Ind/2014 assessed at Rs.2,50,480/- as against income of Rs.25,977/- shown in return. Assessing Officer has initiated penalty proceedings for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Assessing Officer has given show cause notice but in reply to said show cause notice, assessee has not filed any reply. Therefore, penalty was levied. On appeal, learned CIT(A) reduced penalty to Rs. 70,000/-. Now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. Before us, learned counsel for assessee submitted that learned CIT(A) was not justified in restricting penalty of Rs. 70,000/-. On other hand, learned DR submitted that assessee has failed to furnish any reply to show cause notice issued by Assessing Officer and as such penalty is justified. 5. We have heard both sides. We find that in response to show cause notice issued by Assessing Officer, assessee did not furnish any reply. We further find that while deciding issue, learned CIT(A) has not asked for remand report from Assessing Officer. Therefore, in our 4 Gopal Bhargava ITA No. 614/Ind/2014 view, it would be reasonable to restore issue to file of Assessing Officer for deciding same afresh after issuing show cause notice to assessee to furnish his reply. Needless to state that if assessee again fails to furnish any reply, Assessing Officer is at liberty to make assessment as per law. We order accordingly. 6. In result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. order has been pronounced in open Court on 29 September, 2016. SD/- sd/- (O.P.Meena) (D.T.Garasia) Accountant Member Judicial Member /Dated : 29 September, 2016. Dn/ 5 Gopal Bhargava ITA No. 614/Ind/2014 6 Gopal Bhargava v. ACIT 1(1), Bhopal