2022 (1) TMI 1203 - AT - Income Tax

Levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(b) - assessee did not comply to the notice u/s.142(1) and 143(2) and apart from filing the bank details did not appear - HELD THAT - We find the assessment in the instant case was completed u/s.143(3)/153A - find an identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in the case of Odimco Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (5) TMI 2108 - ITAT DLEHI wherein deleted the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(b) wherein do not find cogent reason to observe any willful default on the part of the assessee or non co-operative attitude with the department. Therefore, we find no justification to sustain the penalty imposed u/s. 271(l)(c) - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the IT Act for Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09.

Analysis:

1. Background and Assessment Details:
The appeals were filed against the order of the CIT(A) confirming the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) of the IT Act for the mentioned assessment years. The assessee, an individual, had their assessment completed under section 153A/143(3) for declaring total income. The penalty was initiated due to non-compliance with notices under sections 142(1) and 143(2).

2. Appellant's Arguments:
The appellant argued that penalties were deleted in similar cases where assessments were completed under section 143(3). Citing cases like Glenasia Commodities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and Odimco Technologies P. Ltd., the appellant contended that penalties should be deleted in this case as well.

3. Respondent's Position:
The respondent heavily relied on the order of the CIT(A) upholding the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer.

4. Tribunal's Decision:
After considering arguments and precedents, the Tribunal found that penalties were unjustified. Referring to the case of Odimco Technologies Pvt. Ltd., where penalties were deleted under similar circumstances, the Tribunal observed that non-compliance earlier was overlooked due to subsequent compliances during assessment proceedings. The Tribunal concluded that there was no willful default or non-cooperative attitude from the assessee, directing the cancellation of penalties for all assessment years.

5. Judicial Precedents and Rulings:
The Tribunal also cited cases like Globus Infocom Limited vs. DCIT, following the decision in Akhil Bharatiya Prathamik Shaikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs. ACIT, to support the deletion of penalties. The Tribunal emphasized that the explanation provided by the assessee for the delay in furnishing information was plausible and justified the deletion of penalties under section 271(1)(b) of the Act.

6. Final Verdict and Order:
In line with the decisions in similar cases, the Tribunal allowed all four appeals filed by the assessee. The penalties imposed under section 271(1)(b) of the IT Act for the mentioned assessment years were directed to be deleted. The order was pronounced on 27th January 2022, in favor of the assessee.

This detailed analysis highlights the key arguments, legal precedents, and the final decision of the Tribunal regarding the penalty levied under section 271(1)(b) of the IT Act for the mentioned assessment years.