IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA. 1686/Ahd/2011 (Assessment Year:2005-06) Shri Ibrahimbhai K. Langada, Prop. of R. K. Steel Traders, Savarkundla Road, Nr. Rannade Marble, Mahuva, Dist: Bhavnagar Appellant Vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Bhavnagar Respondent PAN: ACAPL6536G By Assessee : Shri Parimal Singh Parmar, A.R. By Revenue : Shri S. L. Chandel, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 09.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2016 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This assessee s appeal for assessment year 2005-06 arises from CIT(A)-XX, Ahmedabad s order dated 24.03.2011 in case ITA No.2806/Ahd/2013 (M/s. M. D. Shah & Co. vs. ITO) A.Y. 2007-08 -2- no. CIT(A) XX/2/10-11 affirming penalty of Rs.2,65,090/- imposed by Assessing Officer vide order dated 23.02.2010, in proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961; in short Act . 2. Relevant facts of case are in narrow compass. Both lower authorities have imposed impugned penalty by holding assessee to have furnished inaccurate particulars of income and its concealment to tune of Rs.8,07,786/-. This amount in fact represents corresponding addition made in course of assessment after rejection of assessee s claim to have received cash gifts from his father-in-law Shri Ismailbhai. This donor appears to have placed on record land revenue documents proving to have owned 75 bighas land. All this followed his confirmation in course of scrutiny as well. mode of gifts in question is peacemill instances of Rs.85000/- per year for last 11 years. Assessing Officer made impugned addition as upheld by CIT(A) in his order dated 29.01.2009. This tribunal dismissed assessee s appeal ITA No.1404/Ahd/2009 on 27.04.2011 in default for non prosecution. same is yet to be restored. 3. We have heard both parties reiterating their respective stand against and in support of impugned penalty. It has come on record that assessee has been able to produce his father-in-law/doner alongwith all evidence of source of income and documentary proof (supra). Meaning thereby that it is not case of making altogether false claim. coordinate bench of tribunal in ITA No.3032/Ahd/2010 Chhaganbhai K Patel ITA No.2806/Ahd/2013 (M/s. M. D. Shah & Co. vs. ITO) A.Y. 2007-08 -3- vs. ITO decided on 05.09.2014 deletes identical penalty in case of similar gift claimed back by very kind of evidence. We follow same in instant appeal as well to delete impugned penalty of Rs.2,65,090/-. 4. This assessee s appeal is allowed. [Pronounced in open Court on this 30th day of September, 2016.] Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 30/09/2016 True Copy S.K.SINHA Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Revenue 2. Assessee 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order Ibrahimbhai K. Langada v. ITO, Ward 1(1), Bhavnagar