9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 875X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the assessment order ex-parte taking into consideration the assessee has not advanced any documents pertaining to sale of house in question. It is also noted from the record that the assessee is not having any taxable income and the AO has not given the benefit of indexed cost of acquisition and indexed cost of improvement on the immovable property in question and thus in that eventuality the capital gain arose on the sale of immovable property would have been below taxable limit. This plea of the assessee in view tantamounts to reasonable cause as is prescribed u/s 273B - While giving benefit of the same, the Bench deletes the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271F - Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - ITA No. 95/JP/2022 - - - Dated:- 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi on 9-12-2021 to the assessee. This information of passing the order by the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi came to the notice of the assessee on 4th March 2022. Hence, the delay took place in filing of the appeal before the Hon ble ITAT. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR opposed the application of the assessee for condondation of delay. 2.3 The Bench heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench finds that there is a sufficient cause in late filing the appeal by the assessee in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji, 167 ITR 471 observed as under:- The Legislature h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sse challenging the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi in confirming the penalty of Rs.5,000/- levied by the AO u/s 271F of the Act. Brief facts of the case are that while completing the assessment ex-parte u/s 144/147 of the Act on 25-10-2018, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271F of the Act for not filing the return of income for the year under considerations. Subsequently, the AO vide order dated 19-03-2019 levied penalty of Rs.5,000/- u/s 271F of the Act on the ground that the assessee was having income from long term capital gain at Rs.6,501,313/- on sale of residential house property situated at Plot No. 40-A/1, Krishna Colony, Ramgarh Mode, Amer Road, Jaipur whereas the ld. AR of the submitted before us that the AO was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... though having taxable income, attract the provisions of Section 271F of the I.T. Act. These observations are acceptable and agreeable. In view of the above discussion, I found that AO is justified in levying penalty of Rs.5,000/- u/s 271F. Accordingly, penalty imposed by the AO is confirmed. In the result, appeal is dismissed. 3.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the lower authorities. 3.4 After hearing both the parties, perusing the materials available on record and appreciating the details submitted by the ld. AR of the assessee, it is noted that the cost of acquisition of plot as per the assessee was Rs.555/- purchased on 16-04- 1999 and thereafter addition/ improvement of Rs.3,41,000/- was made. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
