MUKESH KUMAR,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5-AMBALA, AMBALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 20/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 June 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 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 since the hearing notices were not received by the assessee, it was not a fit case for imposing a penalty. The penalty was accordingly deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a return of income, and the case was reopened for the purchase of debentures. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(b) is leviable when the assessee did not receive hearing notices and failed to comply.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं. / (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Mukesh Kumar ITO बनाम/ H.No. 252, Luxmi Nagar Ward-5 Vs. Jandli, Ambala City-134003. Ambala.134003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.ARHPK-6384-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Vineet Krishan (Advocate) – Ld. AR ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 22-05-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 02-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012- 13 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Fearless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 13-12-2024 confirming penalty of Rs.10,000/- as levied by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 271(1)(b) vide order dated 17-01-2024. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

2.

The assessee did not file his return of income. However, the case was reopened to examine the issue of purchase of debentures for Rs.5 Lacs by the assessee. The Ld. AO issued initial notice u/s 142(1) on 08-08-2019 followed by three other notices which were not responded to by the assessee and no return of income was filed by the assessee. Accordingly, the amount of Rs.5 Lacs was added to the income of the assessee. The Ld. AO initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for failure to comply with hearing notice dated 08-08-2019 and levied impugned penalty of Rs.10,000/-.

3.

During first appeal, the assessee drew attention to the fact that quantum appeal was restored back by Tribunal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication by observing that hearing notices were not received by the assessee. However, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. It emerges that the quantum appeal has already been restored back by Tribunal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the observation that hearing notices were not received by the assessee. On these facts, the assessee could not be penalized and therefore, it is not a fit case for levy of penalty. Accordingly, we delete the same. 5. The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 02-06-2025. (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 02-06-2025. आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. ""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड"फाईल/GF

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 →