2023 (5) TMI 464 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty levied u/s 271F - Return of income (ITR) was filed in time but could be e-verified due to health issues - violation of the provisions of sub section (1) of the section 139 by not filing the return of income within the time limit - assessee has submitted that he was prevented by reasonable cause for not doing the E-verification of the return filed, thus the delay is neither willful nor wanton - HELD THAT - The case of the assessee is that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 30.09.2014 through his representative CA and after few days he fell in sick, hospitalized and thereafter he expired on 17.11.2014. Copy of the death certificate was brought on record. The assessee was under bonafide belief that the CA would have filed E-verification. Only after service of notice u/s148 assessee came to know that E-verification was not done while filing the return of income on 30.09.2014. Thereafter in response to the notice under section 148 assessee once again filed the return. Since the delay in doing E-verification/filing belated return is neither willful nor wanton and the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause, we are of the considered opinion that the penalty is not liable to be levied under section 271F of the Act - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
The case involves an appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for failure to file the return of income within the stipulated time limit.

Issue 1: Assessment and Penalty Imposition
The assessment was completed under section 147/144 of the Act, and the penalty of &8377;5,000 was levied under section 271F for not filing the return within the specified time limit under section 139(1) of the Act. The penalty was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A).

Issue 2: Grounds of Appeal
The appellant contended that the delay in E-verification of the return filed was due to reasonable cause, and not wilful or wanton. The appellant sought deletion of the penalty levied under section 271F of the Act.

Issue 3: Tribunal's Decision
After considering the submissions and evidence, the Tribunal noted that the delay in E-verification was due to the representative's illness and subsequent demise, which prevented timely action. The Tribunal found that the delay was not wilful or wanton, and the appellant was prevented by reasonable cause. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to delete the penalty of &8377;5,000 imposed under section 271F of the Act.

In the case, the appellant filed an appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271F of the Income Tax Act for failing to file the return of income within the prescribed time limit. The appellant argued that the delay in E-verification was due to reasonable cause, as the representative who filed the return fell ill, was hospitalized, and subsequently passed away. The appellant believed that the representative had completed the E-verification process. Upon realizing the oversight after receiving a notice under section 148 of the Act, the appellant promptly refiled the return. The Tribunal acknowledged the circumstances leading to the delay and the appellant's genuine belief regarding the E-verification process. Considering the facts presented, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was not justified as the delay was not intentional but caused by unforeseen events. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty of &8377;5,000 imposed under section 271F of the Act.