9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1581X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, the appropriate replies were to be filed, the assessee prayed for the time to submit the reply and ultimately submitted all the necessary replies and cooperated with the Department. We are of the view that assessees had reasonable cause for non-appearance on that day. Therefore, there is no justification for levying the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. Secondly, in this matter, the assessments have been completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, therefore, no penalty can be levied if the assessments have been completed u/s 143(3) and there is subsequent compliances in the assessment proceedings was considered as good compliances and default committed earlier were ignored. Therefore, penalty u/s 271(1)(b) was deleted by various Tribunals - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15.10.2015 no submissions were filed with regard to the notice/questionnaire u/s 142(1) of the Act. Therefore, show cause notice for penalty was issued by the AO to the assessee on 07.12.2015 as to why penalty should not be levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for non compliance to notice u/s 142(1) dated 15.10.2015. The date of hearing was fixed for 15.12.2015. However, again no reply/submissions were filed by the assessee on or before the date of hearing, Also, no reason/explanation was given by the assessee for non- compliance on the said date. Therefore, the AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for ₹ 10,000/- on 04.01.2016, for non compliance to notice u/s 142(1) dated 15.10.2015 for each assessment year from 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30 cases group was received on 09.10.2015, to be complied on 15.10.2015, which was practically impossible to comply with all details in short span of 7 days. However, subsequent notices dated 17.12.2015 to 24.12.2015 were duly complied and assessment was framed u/s 143(3). Further, Sheri D.S.Tiwari, AR of the assessee had verbally requested time for filing details. Therefore, there was no delaying tactics to hamper investigation. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that it is held by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax; (2008) 115 TTJ 419(Del) that where the assessee had not complied with notice u/s 142(1) but assessment order wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Representative of the assessee, the assessees' counsel appeared and stated categorically that he appeared for seeking time. The counsel regularly attended the proceedings and the assessments have been framed u/ s 143(3) and not u/ s 144. We find that this was the first notice for compliance and since the voluminous records and papers were required to be scrutinized and individually in each case, the appropriate replies were to be filed, the assessee prayed for the time to submit the reply and ultimately submitted all the necessary replies and cooperated with the Department. We are of the view that assessees had reasonable cause for non-appearance on that day. Therefore, there is no justification for levying the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
