Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual, did not file a return of income for AY 2016-17 and purchased immovable property. A reassessment proceeding was initiated, and during the assessment, notices were not complied with, leading to penalties under Section 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee was absent from India due to compelling circumstances, which constituted a reasonable cause under Section 273B of the Act. Therefore, the penalties imposed were deleted.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's absence from India constituted a reasonable cause for non-compliance with assessment notices and for not filing the return of income, thereby warranting deletion of penalties.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 142(1), 271(1)(b), 271F, 273B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI HON’BLE S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member):
These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the two separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 04.02.2025 and dated 03.02.2025 for Assessment Years 2016-17 in penalty appeals u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act respectively.
& 769/Chny/2025 Shalini Sanjeevi :- 2 -:
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed return of income for the AY 2016-17. The information flagged is that during the year under consideration the assessee had purchased immovable property for a consideration of Rs.1,00,65,900/-.
Subsequently, the case was selected for reassessment proceeding u/s 147 of the Act. Accordingly an order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed on 13.12.2023 by making addition of Rs. Rs.1,00,65,900/- on account of unexplained investment. During the assessment proceeding notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued three times upon the assessee which were not complied. Therefore, AO imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act.
Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the imposition of both the penalties. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the both penalties.
Aggrieved, assessee is in further appeal before us.
Before us, the Ld. counsel submitted that the assessee was absent from India continuously on account of compelling reasons/ & 769/Chny/2025 Shalini Sanjeevi :- 3 -: circumstances which would constitute reasonable cause in terms of section 273B of the Act. He further contended that the issuance of hearing notices during the course of appellate proceedings has been sent to some other mail and not to the email ID as mentioned in the Form No. 35.
Per contra, the Ld. DR, Ms. Gautami Manivasagam, JCIT has relied upon the impugned orders and pleaded for the dismissal of the both appeals.
We have heard the both parties. We find that during AY 2016-17, the assessee was not in India on account of the compelling circumstances, hence assessee had neither filed return of income nor received any notices u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act. Therefore, in the above factual matrix, we find afore stated reasons a reasonable cause as enshrined u/s 273B of the Act. Hence, we delete the both penalties imposed u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act.
& 769/Chny/2025 Shalini Sanjeevi :- 4 -:
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced on 10th day of June, 2025 at Chennai.