KHYALILAL MOHANLAL TATER,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1381/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 August 2022AY 2013-146 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment orders themselves indicated that the assessee had made submissions and that the assessments were not made ex-parte under Section 144. Therefore, the penalties levied for non-compliance were cancelled.

What were the facts?

Following a search under Section 132, the assessee was issued notices under Section 142(1) for multiple assessment years. The assessee failed to comply with these notices on the specified dates, leading to penalty proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether penalties under Section 271(1)(b) and 272A(1)(d) are leviable for non-compliance with Section 142(1) notices when subsequent compliance was made and assessment orders were not ex-parte.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b),Section 272A(1)(d),Section 142(1),Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM

For Appellant: Ms. Charmi Shroff, AR
For Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand
Hearing: 16.08.2022Pronounced: 16.08.2022
1.

These are the six appeals filed by the assessee for six different assessment years starting from A.Y. 2013-14 to A.Y. 2018-19 against the confirmation of the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) & 272A(1)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai [the learned CIT(A)] dated 29th March, 2022 of Rs.10,000/- for each of the assessment year. The solitary ground is against the confirmation of the penalty.

3.

The facts for A.Y. 2014-15 to A.Y. 2018-19, are identical except that for A.Ys. 2017-18 and 2018-19. In these appeals involved section 272A(1)(d) of the Act instead of 271(1)(b) of the Act.

5.

The learned Authorized Representative appearing before us submitted the detailed paper book for all the six years. She further relied on several judicial precedents to submit that there is a reasonable cause for non-appearing before the learned Assessing Officer on the appointed date. On 5th March, 2020, the date of hearing took place as per the

8.

Accordingly, reversing the order of the lower authorities, we cancel the penalties levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act and section 272A(1)(d) of the Act of ₹10,000/- for each of these six assessment years.

9.

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16.08.2022.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(b)

All 2,912 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(b) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →