JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2 , BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 213/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 October 2025AY 2018-19Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M JOSHI (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the period for compliance with the notices fell within the Covid-19 lockdown period, making it impossible for the assessee to comply due to extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, the penalty imposed was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee was penalized Rs. 10,000/- under Section 271(1)(b) for failing to furnish income tax returns for A.Y. 2016-17 and A.Y. 2015-16. The notices were issued in March 2020 and February 2021 respectively, during the Covid-19 pandemic. The assessee appealed against the penalty order and the order of the CIT(A) which confirmed the penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty for non-compliance with tax notices is justified when the compliance period falls within the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown restrictions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253,Section 271(1)(b),Section 148,Section 246A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI PARESH M JOSHI

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, AR
For Respondent: Ms. Ila Parmar, CIT-DR with Shri Nihar Sahu
Hearing: 23.10.2025Pronounced: 30.10.2025
5.

In the result “Impugned Order” is set aside and penalty at Rs.10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) upheld in the impugned order is deleted.

6.

Both the parties fairly submitted that the facts and circumstances of other one appeal i.e. ITANo.213/Ind/2025 are exactly identical to the Appeal in ITANo.212/Ind/2025 and similar contentions raised therein may be considered, therefore & 213/Ind/2025 A.Y. 2015-16 & 2018-19 our findings and directions given in ITANo.212/Ind/2025 shall apply mutatis mutandis to this appeal which is accordingly allowed .

5.2 In view of the aforesaid both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced by putting on notice board in terms of Rule 34 of ITAT, Rules, 1963, on 30.10.2025.

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 →