SH. SUSHIL GUPTA,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6422/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 October 2017AY 2007-083 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that there was a reasonable cause for the non-compliance, citing the hospitalization of the assessee's aunt and grandfather. Therefore, the penalty was directed to be deleted in accordance with Section 273B.

What were the facts?

The assessee was levied a penalty of Rs. 10,000 for non-compliance with a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's representative did not appear on the hearing date due to family medical emergencies.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty for non-compliance with a notice under Section 142(1) is justified when there is a reasonable cause for such non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr
Hearing: 24/10/2017

O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 1.9.2014 for the assessment year 2007-08 in relation to the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b).

2.

The assessee is aggrieved by levy of penalty of Rs. 10,000/- for non compliance of notice u/s 142(1) issued on 21.9.2012 fixing the case of hearing on 9.10.2012, on which date as per the AO none appeared nor any written reply was filed. Accordingly, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) was initiated and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was levied again on the ground that in response to the show cause notice for levy of penalty no reply was submitted. Ld. CIT (A)too has confirmed the said penalty.

3. Before us Ld. Counsel submitted that similar penalty was levied in the other group cases, wherein the Hon’ble Tribunal has deleted the said penalty before us. In support he filed the following decisions of the Tribunal :-

Name: ITA Nos.

M/s. Macadam Road Makers P. Ltd. vs. ACIT: 6403 & 6404/Del/2014 Shri Ghanshyam Gupta vs. ACIT: 6375 & 6378/Del/2014 Saraswati Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT: 6281 to 6383/Del/2014 Sanjay Gupta vs. ACIT: 6284 & 6385/Del/2014

4.

Ld. DR on the other hand relied upon the order of the A.O. and the CIT(A).

5.

After considering the relevant finding given in the impugned order as well as the Tribunal order filed before us, we find that the reasons for non compliance of notice u/s 142(1) dated 19.9.2012 was that, the aunt of the assessee, Mrs. Anju Gupta was suffering from severe disease and was hospitalized on 6.10.2012 and thereafter on 9.10.2012, which was the date fixed for hearing, Mr. Satya Prakash 2 Gupta head of the family and grandfather of the assessee was hospitalized due to heart attack. In this situation the whole family was disturbed and accordingly, no compliance would be made. We find that the Ld. CIT (A) out of penalty proceeding initiated and levied for seven years on similar grounds has deleted the penalty for four assessment years but has confirmed the same for three assessment years. Such an adhocism adopted by Ld. CIT(A) for confirming the penalty cannot be appreciated. Since there was a reasonable cause for not attending the hearing on 9.1.2012, therefore, in view of provision of section 273B, the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- as levied by the A.O. is directed to be deleted.

3.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24th October, 2017.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →