Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (1) TMI 1847

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, they are clubbed, heard together and disposed-off by way of this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The brief facts of the case are that there was a search and seizure action in the case of M/s. Gayatri Constructions on 20.12.2012. The assessee was also subjected to search u/s 132 of the Act. Consequently, the assessment proceedings u/s 153A of the Act was initiated. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, the assessee filed 'e' returns for the assessment year 2007-08 to assessment year 2013- 14. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) & 143(2) of the Act were issued calling for certain information in connection with the assessment proceedings. The assessee neither appeared befor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Act, for each such failure for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2013-14. 5. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the A.O. The assessee further submitted that the A.O. was not correct in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act as she had cooperated with the A.O. for completion of assessment, which is evident from the fact that the assessment order is passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act. The assessee further submitted that the A.O. has issued all the notices with a short period of 7 days to 15 days to furnish huge information for a period of 7 years. Since, the information called for by the A.O. is voluminous, she coul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 26 days time, the CIT(A) opined that the assessee failed to offer any explanations for not appearing on the date fixed for hearing and hence, the A.O. was right in levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The Ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in partly sustaining penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14, as the assessee has explained before the A.O., the reasons for non-appearance as on the date of hearing. The A.R. further submitted that the CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the assessee's case falls within the scope of section 273B of the Act, as such levy of penalty is n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oluminous information for 7 assessment years, within a short period of 7 to 15 days. The information called for by the A.O. is voluminous and she could not gather all the information within a span of short period of 7 to 15 days and accordingly, not able to appear before the A.O. as on the date of hearing. 10. Having heard both the sides, we find force in the arguments of the assessee for the reason that the A.O. has given insufficient time to gather voluminous information for a period of seven years. We further observed that the assessment was finally completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act, after fully supplied with all material facts required for assessment proceedings. Hence, we are of the view that the initial failure becomes tech .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or completion of assessment which is evident from the fact that the A.O. has completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. Though, assessee initially not appeared before the A.O. in one or two occasions, the reason given by the assessee for non-appearance appears to be reasonable and bonafide. Therefore, we are of the view that the A.O. was not correct in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. Though, the CIT(A) appreciated the facts, failed to consider the explanation offered by the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14, in view of voluminous information called for by the A.O. and also the assessment being a search assessment. Normally, search assessments are done for 7 years, wherein the assessee is required to furnish information .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates