BADER SULTAN KAKAD,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, PALAKKAD

ITA 591/COCH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 October 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's medical condition and technical limitations, finding the non-compliance to be technical and venial. The penalty was reduced from Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 10,000, with the balance amount to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a 56-year-old lady, failed to file her income tax return for AY 2016-17. The case was reopened, and after she filed a return, she failed to comply with subsequent notices due to medical reasons and technical illiteracy. A penalty was imposed for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices is justified considering the assessee's medical condition and technical illiteracy.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271(1)(b),Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM

For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 27.10.2025Pronounced: 29.10.2025

Per: Anikesh Banerjee, JM The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for brevity, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’] passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act’) for Assessment Year 2016-17, date of order 24/06/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (in short, ‘Ld.AO’) passed under section 271(1)(b) of the Act, date of order 22/08/2024. 2 Bader Sultana Kakad

2.

Brief fact of the case is that is a Muslim lady aged 56 years have not filed returns for the AY 2016-17 relevant to the PY 2015-

16.

The Ld. Juri ictional AO (JAO), Ward 1, Palakkad, in consequence of the information relating to sale of

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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 →