Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE
Assessee by : Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate Department By : Smt.U.Mini Chandran, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 19/02/2020. Date of pronouncement : 26/02/2020. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal by the Revenue and the cross objection by the assessee are directed against the order of Commissioner of C.O.No.148/VIZ/2019 (Smt. Mudunuru Vindhya)
Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Visakhapatnam, dated 26/06/2019 for the Assessment Year 2014-15.
Facts of the case in brief are that assessee has filed her return of income for the year under consideration which is after the end of the relevant assessment year. In the penalty order, the Assessing Officer has noted that as per section 271F of the Act “If a person who is required to furnish a return of his income, as required under sub-section (1) of section 139 or by the proviso to that sub-section, fails to furnish such return before the end of the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer may direct that such person shall pay, by way of penalty, a sum of five thousand rupees”. Accordingly, Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.5,000/- u/sec. 271F of the Act.
On appeal, ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty on the ground that assessee has filed her return of income voluntarily without any notice from the Assessing Officer and on the genuine reasons assessee was not able to file the return in time, which are discussed by the ld. CIT(A) as under:-
I have considered the submissions of the appellant and also the penalty order. From the submission of the appellant, it is noticed that due to separate Telangana agitation and the consequent problems, the company of the appellant could not perform the projects and ended up in financial problems. The appellant had to shift the business operations to Visakhapatnam and that she was in the process of C.O.No.148/VIZ/2019 (Smt. Mudunuru Vindhya) repaying the debts availed for funding the projects of the company. Due to lack of funds, the taxes could not be paid and hence the return could not be filed within time. Most importantly, the return was filed voluntarily without any notice from the assessing officer. As such, I am of the considered view that the delay in filing the return of income is for genuine reasons and hence it is not a fit case for levy of penalty. The penalty of Rs.5000 levied by the assessing officer u/s 271F is hereby cancelled.
We find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
So far as cross objection filed by the assessee is concerned, it is only supportive to the order of the ld. CIT(A). As there is no grievance against the order of the ld. CIT(A), this cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 26th day of Feb., 2020.