9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 646 - AT - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - failure to comply 142(1) notice - Held that - A.O. is correct in holding that the penalty u/s. 271(l)(b) may be attracted for each of such failure to comply 142(1) notice The assessee failed to give any plausible explanation for his failure to comply with the notice issued by the AO. Hence, penalty of ₹ 10,000/- has rightly been imposed and has rightly been confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) in both the years. - Decided against assessee
Issues:
Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act for Asstt. Years 2012-13 and 2013-14. Analysis: The appeals were filed by the assessee against the common order of the ld.CIT(A)-13, Ahmedabad for the Asstt. Years 2007-08 to 2013-14. The grievance of the assessee pertained to the levy of a penalty amounting to &8377; 10,000 under section 271(1)(b) of the Act for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The appeals were heard in the absence of any representation from the assessee, and it was noted that the appeal for the Asstt. Year 2013-14 was time-barred by 46 days. Despite a defect memo being issued to the assessee, no action was taken to rectify the defect or file an application for condonation of delay. Upon careful consideration of the record, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) after examining the details of non-compliance listed in the penalty order. The AO had issued a show cause notice under section 271(1)(b) which remained uncomplied with by the appellant. The ld.CIT(A) found that the appellant failed to provide a satisfactory reason for the non-compliance and distinguished a cited decision related to multiple issue of notices under section 143(2). It was held that the penalty of &8377; 10,000 imposed for each assessment year from 2007-08 to 2013-14 was justified. The Tribunal, after reviewing the findings, concluded that there was no merit in the appeals as the assessee did not offer a plausible explanation for the failure to comply with the notice issued by the AO. Consequently, the penalty of &8377; 10,000 was deemed rightly imposed and confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) for both years. As a result, the appeals of the assessee were dismissed, and the penalty was upheld. The order was pronounced in court on 9th January 2019 at Ahmedabad.
|
