KRISHNA CONSTRUCTION,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1 RANCHI, RANCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 21/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 January 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 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 noted that the assessment order was passed under Section 143(3), implying subsequent cooperation and pardoning of non-compliance by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the penalty levied and confirmed by the CIT(A) was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the penalty order for non-compliance with notices during assessment. The penalty was levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2015-16.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied for non-compliance to notices during assessment is sustainable when the assessment order was passed under Section 143(3)?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kumar Jalan, A.R
For Respondent: Shri R.C. Marndi, Sr.DR
Hearing: 05/01/2026Pronounced: 05/01/2026

Assessee represented by Shri Vinay Kumar Jalan, A.R. Department represented by Shri R.C. Marndi, Sr.DR Date of hearing 05/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 05/01/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2014-15/10301346 dated 23/10/2024 for the A.Y. 2015-16 against the confirmation of penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

Shri Vinay Kumar Jalan, ld. A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri R.C. Marndi, ld. Sr.DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the penalty has been levied for non- compliance to certain notices in the course of assessment. It was a submission that the ld. CIT(A) had issued notice to the assessee on 21/10/2024 asking for compliance by 25/10/2024 but the ld. CIT(A) had without waiting for the compliance by the assessee, passed the order on Krishna Construction Vs DCIT 23/10/2024. It was also the submission that the assessment order itself has been passed under Section 143(3) and therefore, it should be assumed that non-compliance to earlier notices was already pardoned by the Assessing Officer.

4.

In reply, the ld Sr.DR has vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the quantum assessment order has been passed under Section 143(3) after the alleged non-compliance by the assessee, it is assumed that the assessee has subsequently cooperated in the assessment proceedings and therefore, the Assessing Officer has also pardoned the non-compliance. This being so, the penalty as levied by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted.

6.

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order announced in open court on 05/01/2026

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 →