SIDDHARTH JEWELLERY INDIA,CHANDIGARH vs. DY. CIT, CL. 4(1), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 654/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 February 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the AO should not have issued repetitive notices to levy penalty for non-compliance; instead, the AO should have finalized the assessment. Therefore, the Tribunal confined the penalty to Rs. 10,000 for the non-compliance of statutory notices, deleting the remaining part of the penalty.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with five notices issued by the Assessing Officer under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the AO levied a penalty of Rs. 50,000 under section 272A(1)(d), which was upheld by the CIT(A), leading to the present appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with multiple statutory notices should be confirmed in full or restricted to a single instance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(1)(d),Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Hearing: 12.02.2026Pronounced: 20.02.2026

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 27.03.2024 passed for assessment year 2017-18.

2.

The grievance of the assessee is that ld.CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act.

ITA No.654/CHD/2024 A.Y.2017-18 2

3.

With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out that AO has issued notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act on different occasions. Details of these notices have been noticed by the ld.CIT (Appeals) at page 2. There are 5 notices which have not been complied with by the assessee. Accordingly, AO has imposed a fine of Rs.50,000/- i.e. (Rs.10,000x5) vide his order dated 11.11.2019. This order of the AO has been upheld by the ld.CIT (Appeals).

4.

On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that whereas assessee failed to appear before the AO, then AO ought to have not issued repetitive notices for visiting the assessee with penalty. He could have set the assessment machinery in motion and finalize the assessment. Therefore, we confine this penalty only to the extent of Rs.10,000/-. In other words, penalty to the sum of Rs.10,000/- is confirmed on account of non-compliance of the statutory notices by the assessee. Rest deleted.

ITA No.654/CHD/2024 A.Y.2017-18 3

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced on 20.02.2026.

More judgments on Section 272A(1)(d)

All 1,125 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(1)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →