RAVINDER SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD-3(5), LUDHIANA
1
Assessment Year: 2017-18
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
HYBRID HEARING
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT
AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.320/CHANDI/2025
(िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2017-18)
Shri Ravinder Singh
(Prop. M/s Nirmal Fashions)
Beas Hosiery Complex, Kailash Nagar Road,
Opp.
Radha
Swami
Satsang
Bhawan,
Ludhiana-141007. बनाम/
Vs.
ITO-Ward-3(5)
Ludhiana.
̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BRZPS-2060-R
(अपीलाथŎ/Appellant)
:
(ŮȑथŎ / Respondent)
अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Amarjit Kamboj (CA) (Virtual Mode) – Ld. AR
ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by :
Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing
:
25-08-2025
घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement
:
02-09-2025
आदेश / O R D E R
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 14-01-2025 confirming penalty of Rs.50,000/- as levied by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 272(1)(d) r.w.s. 274 of the Act vide order
2
Assessment Year: 2017-18
dated 02-02-2022. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.
2. An assessment has been framed against the assessee on best judgment basis u/s 144 on 04-12-2019 wherein returned income of Rs.10.49 Lacs was assessed at Rs.132.81 Lacs. The assessee failed to appear during assessment proceedings. Since the assessee did not comply with 5 hearing notices as issued by Ld. AO u/s 142(1) on various dates, impugned penalty was initiated for non-compliance of these notices. The Ld. AO imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- for each of the five defaults on the ground that the assessee failed to establish reasonable cause for non-appearances. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same on the ground that the notices were received on email id of assessee’s Chartered Accountant and there was no reasonable cause.
Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
The assessee, indeed, has defaulted in complying with identical notices as issued by Ld. AO u/s 142(1) from time to time. However, it could be seen that penalty has been levied for five identical defaults which are recurring in nature. The Ld. AO could have framed best judgment assessment immediately after serving initial notice only. Therefore, we restrict the impugned penalty to the extent of Rs.10,000/- only for first default. No other ground has been urged in the appeal.
3
Assessment Year: 2017-18
The appeal stand partly allowed. Order pronounced on 02-09-2025. (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 02-09-2025. आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent
3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT
4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR
5. गाडŊफाईल/GF