9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dered as good compliance and defaults earlier committed were ignored by the AO. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 738/Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 29-6-2016 - SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by: Mr. Pratap Gupta, CA Respondent by: Shri T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the impugned order dated 6.12.2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XV, New Delhi, confirming the imposition of penalty of ₹ 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under:- During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO issued statuto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT in the case of Akhil Bharatiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust Vs ACIT {2008} 5 DTR (Del) (Trib) 429, in which it was held that where an order under Section 143(3) has been issued and not under Section 144 of the Act, the same implies that the subsequent compliance in the assessment proceedings is considered as good compliance and defaults earlier committed were ignored by the AO. 4. The Ld. DR submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) has carefully considered the facts of the case and the applicable case laws in the matter. As per section 271(l)(b), penalty for each instance of default may be levied @Rs. 10,000/- if the concerned authority, during the course of proceedings, is satisfied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord. We find that the instant appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi in the case of Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan trust vs ACIT 5 DTR 429 (Delhi Tribunal) wherein the Coordinate Bench in paras 2.4 and 2.5 has held as under:- 2.4 Coming to the issue of recording of satisfaction, it may be mentioned that mere initiation of penalty does not amount to satisfaction as held by Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ram Commercial Enterprises Ltd. (2001) 167 CTR (Del) 321 : (2000) 246 ITR 568 (Del). In absence of recording of the satisfaction in the assessment order, mere initiation of penalty will not confer jurisdiction on the AO to levy the penalty. 2.5 We also find t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
