SHANKAR MATH,NEW DELHI vs. WARD EXEMPTION 2(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4288/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 December 2025AY 2011-12Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had made out a reasonable cause for the delay in furnishing the return, citing communication gaps between management and the auditor, and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, the penalty was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns a penalty imposed under Section 272A(2)(e) for failing to furnish a return of income for 2423 days. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,42,300 at Rs. 100 per day.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for the inordinate delay in filing the return of income, justifying deletion of the penalty under Section 272A(2)(e).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(2)(e),Section 274

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

Hearing: 19.11.2025Pronounced: 04.12.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1076066894(1) dated 07.05.2025, in proceedings u/s 272A(2)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

We note at the outset that the assessee/appellant’s sole substantive ground raised during the course of hearing challenges both the learned lower authorities’ action imposing section 272A(2)(e) penalty of Rs.2,42,300/- computed @ Rs. 100 per day for default of 2423 days in furnishing return; in the Assessing Officer’s order dated 21.03.2022 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

Shankar Math 4. Learned CIT-DR vehemently argues that the assessee all along has failed to plead and prove any justifiable reason explaining non-filing of his return for an extraordinary period of 2423 days. He could hardly dispute this assessee is a trust wherein possibility of communication gaps between management and auditor could not be altogether ruled out and; that too, in an instance wherein there was Covid-19 pandemic outbreak during the initiation of penalty proceedings by the learned Assessing Officer. We accordingly are of the considered view that the assessee has indeed made out a reasonable cause within the meaning of section 274 of the Act for having not furnished it’s return in the above time period to delete the impugned penalty levied by both the learned lower authorities.

More judgments on Section 272A(2)(e)

All 82 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(2)(e) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →