SAI REFINERY,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO,PARWANOO, PARWANOO

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1672/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 May 2026AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that penalty should not be levied multiple times for the same default. It restricted the penalty to Rs. 10,000, considering the deterrent nature of the provision.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with three notices issued under Section 142(1) during reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer levied a penalty of Rs. 30,000, comprising Rs. 10,000 for each non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(b) can be levied multiple times for non-compliance with several notices for the same default. The quantum of penalty for non-compliance with notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1),Section 271(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.1672/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/s Sai Refinery ITO House No. 207, Gomes Colony Building No. PWN01 बनाम/ Vs. Avenue Fourth, Vaishali Nagar Parwanoo Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302003 (Himachal Pradesh)-173220 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABRFS-9439-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ� / Respondent) : अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Mohan Chaudhary (Advocate) – Ld. AR (Virtual) ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19-05-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 20-05-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 17-10-2025 confirming penalty of Rs.30,000/- as levied by Ld. AO u/s 271(1)(b) vide order dated 29-09- 2023. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

2.

The impugned penalty stem from the fact that the assessee’s case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 31-03-2022. During assessment proceedings, notices u/s 142(1) was issued on three occasions which remain to be complied with by the assessee. Consequently, Ld. AO initiated impugned penalty for non-compliance. In the absence of any defense forthcoming from the assessee during penalty proceedings, Ld. AO levied penalty of Rs.30,000/- computed at Rs.10,000/- for each of the three defaults. 3. During first appeal, the assessee, inter-alia, stated that penalty could not be levied for each and every notice issued to the assessee. The default of non-compliance of all the notice was same and therefore, penalty for non-compliance of first notice only could be levied. However, Ld. CIT(A) rejected the submissions and confirmed the penalty against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. It clearly emerges that penalty has been levied thrice whereas the default remain the same. The Ld. AO could have proceeded with assessment proceedings immediately after issuance of first notice only. Therefore, at the most, the penalty for first default could be levied as held by Delhi Tribunal in the case of Smt. Rekha Rani vs. DCIT (ITA No.6131/Del/2013) holding that the provision of Sec.271(1)(b) was deterrent in nature and not for earning revenue. Any other view taken shall lead to imposition of penalty for any number of times (without limits) for the same default of not appearing in response to the notices. The same was held to be not justified. Taking the same view, we

restrict the impugned penalty to the extent of Rs.10,000/-. No other ground has been urged in the appeal. 5. The appeal stand partly allowed. Order pronounced on 20th May, 2026.

-Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated: 20-05-2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →