RANJEET SHIVHARE,BETUL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 57/JAB/2017Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 March 2018AY 2014-153 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 found that both assessees had reasonable cause for non-compliance due to medical reasons (accident and illness). The Tribunal also noted subsequent cooperation in assessment proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessees failed to comply with notices issued by the Assessing Officer for filing returns and questionnaires after a search under Section 132. Penalties were imposed under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) is leviable when the assessee has a reasonable cause for non-compliance, as per Section 273B.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, CA
Hearing: 15/03/2018Pronounced: 16/03/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ��./ ITA Nos. 53 to 59/Jab/2017 �� � � � � � �  / Assessment Year : 2010-11 to 2016-17   Ranjeet Shivhare, Deputy Commissioner of C-29, Civil Lines, Vs Income-tax Betul (MP) Cenral-1, PAN : ARUPS 3197 F Bhopal ��./ ITA Nos. 62 to 68/Jab/2017 �� � � � � � �  / Assessment Year : 2010-11 to 2016-17   Smt. Sunita Shivhare Deputy Commissioner of C-29, Civil Lines, Vs Income-tax Betul (MP) Cenral-1, PAN : BDGPS 4272 Q Bhopal / (Appellant) / (Respondent)         Assessee by : Shri Dhiraj Ghai, CA Revenue by : Shri PD Chougule, DR $ %&'/Date of Hearing : 15/03/2018 ! "# $ %&' /Date of Pronouncement: 16/03/2018 ()*+ "# .//O R D E R , - PER BENCH :- This bunch of fourteen appeals by two assessees (seven appeals each) have been filed against two separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal (MP) dated 02.08.2017 in the case Smt. Sunita Shivhare and dated 11.08.2017 in the case of Shri Ranjeet Shivhare, arising out of order u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “the Act”) framed by the DCIT (Central)-1, Bhopal imposing penalty of Rs.10,000/- each in Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2016- 17. Since all these appeals pertain to the same group and the issue involved is also identical, all these appeals are decided by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

ITA Nos. 53 to 59 & 62 to 68/Jab/2017 Assessee : Ranjeet Shivhare & Sunita Shivhare AY : 2010-11 to 2016-17 2

2.

The facts of the case, as culled from the records, are that a search under Section 132 was carried out in the case of the assessee(s) on 07.01.2016. Assessee(s) was asked to file the returns of income u/s 153 A for all the A.Ys 2010-11 to 2015-16 vide notice dated 27.10.2016. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 142(1) with questionnaires for A.Ys 2010-11 to 2016-17 on 22.05.2017 and required compliance on 29.05.2017 and also informed that failing to compliance of said notice would attract penalty of Rs. 10,000/- for each assessment year. However, on the date fixed for hearing on 29.05.2017, no compliance was made. Therefore, show cause notices for all the A.Ys 2010-11 to 2016-17 were issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee(s), which were also not complied with. Subsequently, Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act for each assessment year. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer imposing penalty, assessee(s) went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but did not succeed. Further aggrieved, the assessee(s) is now in appeal before us.

4.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. We find that one of the assessee Smt. Sunita Shivhare met with an accident and incurred injury in the left angle. She was operated at Manipal Hospital and also confined to bed for a long time. Various documents are placed in the paper-book from page no.7-14 which substantiate the fact of the injury as well as regular medical treatment, which prevented the assessee to appear before the Assessing Authority on various dates of hearing. In the case of another assessee Shri Ranjeet Shivhare also appearance before the Assessing Authority was prevented due to illness because of which the assessee has to undergo regular treatment. We, therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, observe that both the assessees are having a reasonable cause which prevented them from

ITA Nos. 53 to 59 & 62 to 68/Jab/2017 Assessee : Ranjeet Shivhare & Sunita Shivhare AY : 2010-11 to 2016-17 3

appearing on various dates of hearing before the Assessing Authority. However, this fact is not disputed that subsequently the assessee co- operated in the completion of assessment proceedings. Section 273B of the Act provides that penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(b) may be deleted if the assessee has a reasonable cause which prevents him/her from complying to the notices issued by the Assessing Authority and in the instant appeals also we are satisfied with the reasons given by the assessee which prevented them to appear before the Assessing Authority on various dates of hearing. We, therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, are of the view that both the assessees should not have been visited with penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act and we, accordingly, delete the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer in all these assessment years and allow all these appeals of the assessee.

5.

In the result, all fourteen appeals filed by the assessee(s) are allowed

Order pronounced in the Court on 16th March, 2018 at Jabalpur.

Sd/- Sd/-

(KUL BHARAT) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jabalpur; Dated 16/03/ 2018 *Bit 8/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 012 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 9 7: ;<2 7 = 1. >?@ABCD / The Appellant 2. EFGCD / The Respondent. 3. NGQR / Concerned CIT HIJIKLM NG OP 4. TUV) / The CIT(A) GQR( NGO P N S 5. ^a,/ DR, ITAT, Jabalpur KL, [\ KWXBY @G EKMKZ ]^ S TUVU \ S_`] 6. eA / Guard file. YBbc dB n/ BY ORDER, f gh i j kl m j TRUE COPY n (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) p/ o m q j r s pt u v s j g / ITAT, Jabalpur {, f r s n w p v x v r w y z s n w q | gj } j

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 →