9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Besides in any case adjournment applications ought to have been filed citing any reason which existed. Non filing of adjournment applications and non attendance of proceedings cannot be viewed lightly. The assessee has thus failed to show any demonstrable reasons of sufficient cause for non compliance. In view thereof, see no infirmity in the orders of lower authorities imposing the impugned penalties. - Decided against assessee X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that before the ld. CIT(A), vide letter dated 16.04.2013, assessee reiterated the stand and further submitted that time-barring for the impugned assessment was 31.03.2014 and the assessment order was not passed till 31.03.2013, even though the assessee has furnished all the details called for by the Assessing Officer. 2.2 The assessment proceedings have been passed u/s 143(3) of the Act and not u/s 144 of the Act without, reliance is placed on following cases has held that when the assessment order has been passed u/s 143(3) of the Act and not u/s 144 of the Act, then the non-compliance is deemed to have been waived, and accordingly, penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act has been deleted by the Tribunal:- i) Shri Arvindbhai Chandulal S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he observations of ld. AO and ld. CIT(A) in this behalf in the lead case of Kanhai Corporation: Observations of ld. AO "5. The submission of the assessee is not acceptable. The survey in the case of assessee group was conducted on 21.09.2010, assessee filed its returns on 28.09.2011 and the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 17.09.2012. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 17.10.2012 asking the assessee to furnish details on 30.10.2012. It is also pertinent to mention here that the Xerox copies of all seized documents relating to the entire Pradip Overseas Group was provided to the assessees by the Investigation Wing immediately after conclusion of the search proceedings. Therefore, the assessee was well in poss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the non-compliance. Rather the reverse is true that the AO has held that the appellant has not bothered to comply with the notice deliberately and made observations about misplaced understanding which was never the case hence he proceeded to levy the penalty even before the assessment was completed which is normally the case." 3.1 Apropos case laws it is contended that the same are not applicable as rightly held by ld. CIT(A). The penalty u/s 271(1)(b) can be imposed prior to assessments, therefore, whether the assessments may be framed subsequently u/s 143(3) or 144 cannot have any implication of the penalty when the assessment itself is not framed. In these cases the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) have been imposed on 19-12-2012 much prior to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
