9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 786X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ormation could not be furnished before the ITO for the reason that the same had wrongly been furnished before the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Khushinagar. The explanation of the assessee is found to be bona-fide. Accordingly, we order deletion of penalty levied u/s 272A(2)(c) - Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri G. D. Padamahshali, Accountant Member And Shri Subhash Malguria, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri A. P. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. ORDER PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M.: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Gorakhpur dated 22.01.2019 for the assessment year 2013-14, raising the following grounds of appeal: 1. In the facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Rawat (Sub-Registrar/assessee), we find that there was sufficient cause for delay in filing of the appeal. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit this appeal for hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, Sub- Registrar of properties, was required by the Income Tax Officer (I CI), Gorakhpur to furnish information regarding the registered sale/purchase deeds under section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Since no information was furnished even after issuance of reminders, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee for initiating proceedings under section 272A(2)(c) of the Act. Since the assessee has failed to discharge the obligation prescribed under section 133(6) of the Act by furnishing the requisite info ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Khushinagar, therefore, the act of the assessee in not furnishing the same before the ITO being purely unintentional and legitimate, the penalty should not have been levied. He accordingly prayed that the penalty levied under section 272A(2)(c) of the Act by the ITO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) be deleted. 6. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, supporting the orders of the authorities below, has submitted that the assessee was under obligation to provide the information sought for by the ITO under section 133(6) of the Act. However, the assessee failed to furnish the same despite various opportunities afforded, therefore, the penalty has rightly been levied under section 272A(2)(c) of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
