9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w authorized representative and therefore sought further time by filing its letter dated 04.01.2019 but the AO extended the time only up to 10.01.2019 admittedly a shorter period which resulted into noncompliance, however subsequently the Assessee complied with the notices by filling relevant details/documents specifically on 25-03- 2019. Accordingly, the reasons submitted for non-compliance by the Assessee prima facie appears to be bonafide and unintentional and therefore considering the reasons for the minuscule delay in filing of the relevant documents, as reasonable and inadvertent, we are inclined to delete the penalty under consideration. Thus, the penalty under consideration is deleted. Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tiated vide notice dated 11.03.2019 u/s 274A r.w.s 271G of the Act for noncompliance to the notice u/s 92D(3) of the Act issued on 18.12.2018. 2.1 In response to the penalty proceeding notice, the Assessee vide letter dated 19.03.2019 filed in IT office Tapal on 25.03.2019 submitted part details such as form 3CEB, copy of return of income, copy of inter-company agreement and the inter-company invoices. The Assessee in the said letter also claimed that transfer pricing proceedings have already been concluded without any TP adjustments and therefore no penalty u/s 271G of the Act is warranted, as the Assessee had submitted some of the details vide letter dated 19.03.2019 and most of the details mentioned in the notice issued u/s 92D(3) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssions made subsequently and found to be benchmarked correctly, does not absolve the Assessee from statutory penal provisions as provided under the Act for initiation of penalty for non compliances. It is further evident from the submission of the Assessee that the Assessee has brought nothing on record whatsoever nor attributed any reasons for non submission of the requisite documents and details as requisite vide notice dated 18.12.2018 within the prescribed time limit of 60 days. The Assessee company failed to comply with the terms of notices issued u/s 92D(3) of the Act within the prescribed time limit of 60 days and therefore attracted the penalty u/s 271G of the Act. Therefore, he is satisfied that this is a fit case to levy the penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgment passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Excel Bio life Private Limited vs. National Faceless Appeal Center (ITA No.122/M/2024) and ACIT vs. Euro Star Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 158 taxmann.com 410 (Mumbai-Trib.) the penalty is liable to be deleted. 5. On the contrary, the Ld. D.R. refuted the claim of the Assessee. 6. We have heard the parties and given thoughtful considerations to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. It appears from the penalty order dated 25.09.2019 that vide notice dated 18-12-2018 u/s 92CA(2)/92D(3) of the Act issued to the Assessee, various details and documents in support of ALP determination of the transactions reported in form No.3CEB were called for. The Assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
