9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e first default of non-compliance of notice under section 142(1) of the Act was sufficient enough. Thus we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty to the tune of ₹ 20,000/- and confirm the penalty of ₹ 10,000/-only. Hence, this ground of assessee s appeal is partly allowed. - ITA No. 22/AHD/2022 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2022 - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue on merit. 4. The assesse raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The Hon ble CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in imposing penalty Rs.30,000/- under section 271(1)(b) of the income tax Act 1961 for non-compliance of Income Tax Notice without having considered the reasonable cause given which is ignored and not mentioned in the order also. Therefore hereby in the interest of justice the said penalty levied to be deleted. 2. The appellant request to leaves to add to or alter the ground of appeal at or before the time of hearing of the appeal. 5. The only issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty order of AO u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. 6. Briefly, the facts are that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r argument forwarded with regard to penalty proceedings. 8. Aggrieved by this, the assessee has come up in appeal before us. 9. The learned DR before us vehemently supported the order of the authority below. 10. We have heard the learned DR and perused and carefully considered the materials on record. At the outset it was observed that in the identical facts and circumstances, the Delhi Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of assessee in part in the case of Smt. Rekha Rani Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 6131/DEL/2013 by observing that penalty for the first default of non-compliance of notice under section 142(1) of the Act was sufficient enough. The relevant extract of the order reads as under: 5. We have considered the submissions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
