Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against the confirmation of penalties levied by the AO under various sections, including Section 271(1)(b), Section 271A, and Section 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals due to a delay of 139 days without condonation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the appeals concerning penalties under Section 271(1)(c) and Section 271A should be adjudicated on merits, as they are directly related to the quantum appeal pending before the CIT(A). For the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) due to non-compliance with notices, a part was confirmed, and a part was deleted.
Key Issues
Whether penalties levied under Section 271(1)(b), 271A, and 271(1)(c) are to be adjudicated on merits despite the delay, and whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) is justified for non-compliance with notices.
Sections Cited
271(1)(b), 271A, 271(1)(c), 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
(िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Gajanfar Ali ITO Ward Rampur बनाम/ C/o Usha Niwas, Near Police Station Shimla (HP) -172001 Vs. Rohru, Shimla (HP) - 171207 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. APLPA-2865-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Praveen Sharma (Advocate) (Virtual)- Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 02-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 02-12-2025 : आदेश / O R D E R
Aforesaid three appeals by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 assails confirmation of penalties as levied by Ld. AO u/s 271(1)(b) for Rs.60,000/-, penalty of Rs.25,000/- u/s 271A and penalty of Rs.5,01,260/- u/s 271(1)(c). The impugned orders of Ld. CIT(A) have dismissed the appeals in limine for want of condonation of delay of 139 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
The Ld. AR, drawing attention to assessee’s background, pleaded for adjudication of appeal on merits. It has been stated that quantum appeal is already pending for adjudication before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeals.
Considering the fact that the quantum appeal would have direct bearing on impugned penalties as levied by Ld. AO u/s 271(1)(c) & u/s 271A, these penalties are to be adjudicated on merits in the light of quantum appeal. Therefore, the appeals qua these two penalties stand restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of merits with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The issue of delay would not be raised by Ld. CIT(A).
& 1248/Chandi/2025 stand allowed for statistical purposes. 4. So far as the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) is concerned, I find that the identical penalty of Rs.10,000/- each has been levied for 6 defaults since the assessee failed to comply with hearing notices u/s 142(1) on six occasions. Since the default is recurring in nature, I confirm penalty of Rs.10,000/- for first default and delete the remaining penalty of Rs.50,000/-.
Order pronounced on 02nd December, 2025.