LATE MANOJ KUMAR THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SMT. ALKA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2372/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 September 2019AY 2012-134 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' orders, stating that no infirmity was pointed out in the Section 154 order before the CIT(A). Given the absence of the assessee's representation, no interference was deemed necessary.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed certain expenses, leading to an increased total income and a penalty under Section 271(1)(c). Subsequently, the AO passed an order under Section 154 to correct the penalty amount. The assessee, represented by their legal heir, appealed this Section 154 order.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) and subsequently corrected under Section 154 was valid, and if the appeal against the Section 154 order was maintainable without pointing out specific infirmities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “E”: DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI O.P. KANT

Hearing: 16.09.2019Pronounced: 17.09.2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Late Manoj Kumar, The Income Tax Officer, Through Legal Heir Smt. Ward-44(5), E-2 Block, vs., Alka, RZ-C-1/76, Gali Civic Centre, No.38, Mahavir Enclave-II, New Delhi. Palam, New Delhi–110059. PIN - 110 002. PAN AKYPK0833F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 16.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 17.09.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.

This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi, Dated 25.11.2016, for the A.Y. 2012-2013, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c)/154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2 ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar, Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi.

2.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the A.O. passed the assessment order under section 143(3) vide Order Dated 23.03.2015 computing the total income at Rs.37,98,150/- as against the returned income of Rs.9,42,160/- by disallowing certain expenses. The A.O. vide separate Order Dated 28.09.2015 levied the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act for a sum of Rs.3,18,378/-. The A.O, thereafter, passed the Order under section 154 of the I.T. Act, Dated 31.12.2015 computing the penalty to Rs.82,750/-. The assessee challenged this Order under section 154 of the I.T. Act, Dated 31.12.2015 before the Ld. CIT(A). It was pleaded that no penalty can be imposed against the L.R. as no estate has developed on the assessee from the deceased assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of assessee and dismissed the appeal of assessee.

3.

The assessee has been notified the date of hearing twice through registered post. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee.

3 ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar, Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi. 4. We have heard the Ld. D.R. who has supported the Orders of the authorities below by submitting that assessee has merely challenged the Order under section 154 before the Ld. CIT(A) in which no infirmity have been pointed out. Therefore, appeal of assessee rightly dismissed.

5.

After considering the submissions of the Ld. D.R, we are of the view that no interference is called for in the matter. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the Order dated 31.12.2015 passed by ITO, Ward- 44(5), New Delhi, under section 154 of the I.T. Act. The A.O. in this impugned order under section 154 has merely calculated the penalty amount finding mistake therein and reduced the same. No infirmity have been pointed out in the Order of the A.O. before the Ld. CIT(A). In the absence of any representation from the side of the assessee, we are of the view that no interference is called for in the matter.

6.

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed.

4 ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar, Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi. Order pronounced in the open Court.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →