9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 618X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er that the assessee has not justified for non-compliance to the 142(1) notices issued by the Assessing Officer. We further find from ground no. 3 copy of the adjournment letters said to be enclosed with the appeal papers, but we do not find any such adjournment letters filed before us. Further the assessee has not justified why he has not complied to the notices issued u/s. 142(1) by the Assessing Officer. Thus, we do not find any merits in the grounds raised by the assessee. - ITA No. 108/Rjt/2021 - - - Dated:- 11-1-2023 - Ms. Annapurna Gupta , Accountant Member And Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar , Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 07/03/2019 fixing the case for hearing on 15.03.2019 why not the penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) should not be levied and called for explanation from the assessee. In response, the assessee submitted reply dated: Nil received by the A.O. on 18/03/2019. The submission of the assessee was being considered carefully but found not tenable as the assessee has not submitted any explanation regarding non-compliance of the notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act, neither by filing reply nor seeking time to file Reply. Therefore the Assessing Officer levied a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved against this penalty order, the assessee filed an appeal before the National Face ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITR 480, (MP) wherein the Hon'ble High Court dismissed the reference with following observation As held in Jamunadasv. CST [1993] 38 MPLJ 462 (MP) and the common order passed in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 303 of 1986-B.R. Phosphate v. CS7 and Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 304 of 1986-B.R Phosphate v. GS7 by this court on November 6, 1995, this court is not bound to answer the reference. In Jamunadas v. CST [1993] 38 MPLJ 462, it is held as under: For the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that if the party at whose instance the reference .is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, this court is not bound to answer the refer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opy of which is enclosed here with. However the same has not been consider and the appeal of the assesse has been dismissed, resulting in filing of the present second appeal before the Honorable Bench. 4. The subsequent compliance during assessment proceedings means that the earlier defaults are deemed to have been condoned by the Ld.AO. 5. The submission filed before Ld.ClT(A) is relied upon in the second appeal before Hon'ble ITAT Bench. 6. On the facts and the circumstances of the case it is contended that no penalty deserves to be levied. 4.1. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. On the first hearing date namely on 19.05.2022, the assessee sought for an adjournment seeking certain details have to be prepar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
