2023 (1) TMI 1003 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - undisclosed investment u/s 69A - ex parte assessment order - HELD THAT - When the case was listed for hearing on 27/09/2022 and 10/10/2022 assessee filed a letter stating certain details have to be collected and complied and requested for one month adjournment. The same were being granted however none appeared on behalf of the assessee even today. As pleaded in the Grounds of Appeal the assessee has not filed any new materials before us. Assessee being a chronicle defaulter from the assessment stage by passing an ex parte order at Assessment state Penalty stage and even before the CIT(A). None appeared on behalf of the assessee or any Authorized Representative on behalf of the assessee before us. Though the assessee pleaded in its Grounds to file additional evidences in spite of 2 opportunities the same is not filed by the assessee. We have no hesitation in confirming the penalty levied under section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance of notices before the AO. Thus the Grounds raised by the assessee does not hold merits and the same is dismissed. Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-compliance with notices during assessment proceedings.

Analysis:
The appellant, an individual assessee, failed to file the original Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment due to undisclosed investments in shares and issued multiple notices under section 142, which the appellant did not respond to. An ex parte assessment was conducted, resulting in a penalty of Rs. 10,000 for non-compliance with hearing notices. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the penalty, stating that the appellant's excuse of the part-time Accountant being unavailable was not acceptable. The appellant's appeal before the NFAC was also dismissed, leading to the current appeal before the ITAT.

The appellant contended that the penalty should be deleted as they had requested an adjournment for collecting necessary details, which was not considered by the CIT (Appeals). However, the appellant failed to appear before the ITAT and did not submit any new materials. Despite requesting to file additional evidence, the appellant did not do so, leading the ITAT to confirm the penalty under section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices during the assessment proceedings. The ITAT noted the appellant's consistent default throughout the assessment and penalty stages, ultimately dismissing the appeal due to lack of merit.

In conclusion, the ITAT upheld the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) for the appellant's repeated non-compliance with notices during the assessment proceedings. The appeal filed by the Assessee was dismissed, and the penalty of Rs. 10,000 was confirmed.