GOPALBHAI CHELAJI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1390/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 July 2025AY 2014-15Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)3 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 found that the non-compliance was unintentional because the notices were sent to an old address, making the assessee unaware. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that it was not a suitable case for levying penalties under Section 271(1)(b) and set them aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee was levied penalties under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with assessment notices, which resulted in ex-parte assessment orders under Section 147 read with Section 144. The assessee contended that notices were sent to an old address, leading to their non-receipt and unintentional non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether penalties under Section 271(1)(b) are warranted when non-compliance with assessment notices is due to notices being sent to an incorrect/old address, leading to unintentional non-receipt by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b),Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, AR
Hearing: 15/07/2025Pronounced: 29/07/2025

"ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे !साद िस"ा, लेखा सद" के सम%। ] ] Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं / 1391/Ahd/2024 & 1392/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively Gopalbhai Chelaji Prajapati The ITO बनाम/ A-401, Sarvopari Elegance Ward-2(1)(1) v/s. Opp.Satya Apartment Ahmedabad-380 015 Akash Residency Cross Road New Ranip Ahmedabad – 382 470 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AGAPP 3191 P (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.F. Jain, AR Revenue by : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee for different assessment years against the separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)] of even date 18/06/2024 agitating the confirmation of penalty levied by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for non-compliances of the notices issued during the assessment proceedings. , 1391 & 1392/Ahd/2024 Gopalbhai Chelaji Prajapati vs,. ITO Asst. Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively 2 2. At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to various documents placed in the paper-book to show that the notices issued by the AO were sent at old address of the assessee and, hence, the same were not received by the assessee resulting into ex-parte assessment orders of the AO passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act. The Ld.Counsel has further demonstrated that even the assessee was not served with the assessment orders. It has, therefore, been contended that the non- compliances of the notices issued during the assessment proceedings were not intentional, rather due to the aforesaid reasons.

3.

The Ld.DR could not controvert the aforesaid factual position on the file.

4.

Considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that non- compliances of the notices by the assessee, in these cases, was not intentional, rather it was due to the fact that the assessee was not aware of the said notices issued by the AO. Therefore, in our view, these are not fit cases for levying penalty u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act. The impugned penalty levied u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act in all these appeals is hereby set aside.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(b)

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →