9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 837X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. A.O. Thus literally only one proper notice was served to the assessee, wherein adequate time is not given to the assessee to file its reply. Further as explained by the assessee, non-response to the notice is because of disputes between the Partners, considering the facts of the present case, the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) is liable to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 307 & 308/Rjt/2019 - - - Dated:- 16-9-2022 - Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Written Submission For the Respondent : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompliance of notice being not intentional, the same can be kindly condoned and also pleaded some of the notices have been received after the date of hearing. The Assessing Officer considered the above explanation and not satisfied with the explanation offered and therefore levied a penalty of Rs. 60,000/- for non-compliance of notices for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Similarly for the Assessment Year 2013-14, the A.O. levied penalty of Rs. 50,000/- u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeals before the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Rajkot. The ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal for the Assessment Year 2012-13 on the ground that three notices were issued u/s. 142(1), date of service is not mentioned/proved. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the levy of penalty confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference and the appeal filed by the Assessee is liable to be dismissed. 6. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. In fact the Ld. CIT(A) has confined the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) very particularly to the notices which has issued and served on the assessee, wherein the assessee failed to comply/reply to the notices. Thus the ld. CIT(A) partially deleted the penalty levied against the assessee, wherein notices have been served to the assessee beyond the date of hearing or service of notices is not proved by the ld. A.O. Thus literally only one proper notice was served to the assessee, wherein adequate time is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
