9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 928 - AT - Income TaxPenalty proceedings u/s 272A(1)(d) - non compliance to the notices issued u/s 142(1) - HELD THAT - Assessee had complied with the two notices as evidenced by the acknowledgements generated on ITBA Portal and submitted the information called for by the AO within the due date. The assessee had also filed a letter before the AO to keep in abeyance the proceedings till the disposal of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), which was ignored by the AO and proceeded with levying penalty of Rs. 20,000/- against the notices issued, which is not correct and against law. Therefore, set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty levied. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are related to the penalty levied under section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance of notices issued under section 142(1) and the confirmation of the penalty by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. Summary: The appellant, engaged in sun roof painting works and fish trading, filed a return of income declaring taxable income for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice u/s 148, leading to the assessment being completed exparte u/s 144, resulting in additions u/s 69A, 69, 69D, and 69C of the Act. Penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance of notices u/s 142(1). The appeal against the penalty was dismissed by the CIT(A), leading to an appeal before the Tribunal. The appellant contended that they had complied with the notices u/s 142(1) but the penalty levied by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was unjustified. The appellant submitted evidence of compliance and requested to set aside the penalty. After hearing both parties and reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal found that the appellant had indeed complied with the notices as evidenced by acknowledgements on the ITBA Portal. The AO's decision to levy a penalty of Rs. 20,000 was deemed incorrect and against the law. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the AO to delete the penalty. In conclusion, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the penalty levied under section 272A(1)(d) was directed to be deleted. Separate Judgment: No separate judgment was delivered in this case.
|
