BHASKAR RAJARAM THORAT,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), NASHIK

ITA 2301/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 January 2026Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had a reasonable cause for the non-compliance, given his background and reliance on the consultant. Invoking Section 273B, the Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(b) and set aside the CIT(A)'s order, thus allowing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an agriculturist and school peon from a rural area, was levied a penalty of ₹20,000 under Section 271(1)(b) for non-response to notices issued under Section 142(1) for AY 2015-16. The notices were sent to his tax consultant's email, but the consultant failed to inform the assessee, who was not conversant with online processes.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(b) for non-response to notices is leviable when the assessee proves reasonable cause under Section 273B due to a tax consultant's oversight.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b),Section 142(1),Section 250,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Hearing: 29.01.2026Pronounced: 30.01.2026

PER : MANISH BORAD, AM

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] dated 19/08/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) which is arising out of penalty order dated 11.01.2024 passed u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee is against the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act at ₹ 20,000/- for not responding to the notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act.

2 ITA.No.2301/PUN./2025 (Bhaskar Rajaram Thorat)

3.

At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee is an agriculturist livin

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 →