Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arose against a penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) for failure to comply with a section 142(1) notice. The assessee did not appear before the tribunal when the case was called.
Held
The tribunal held that a single default of non-compliance with the notice could not be considered a willful non-compliance. Therefore, the penalty was not leviable in this case.
Key Issues
Whether the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) for a single instance of non-compliance is justified.
Sections Cited
271(1)(b), 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWALShri Shankar Ispat Pvt.
O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arises against Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065081908(1) dated 22.05.2024, involving proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’]. 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Learned DR vehemently argues that both the lower authorities herein have rightly imposed section 271(1)(b) penalty of Rs.10,000/- since the assessee failed to comply with his section 142(1) notice issued during scrutiny proceedings. And that he has further filed any cogent explanation all along explaining his non-cooperation during the course of reassessment. However, we opine that a single default could not be taken as an instant willful non-compliance in the given facts and therefore, this is not a fit case for levying of impugned penalty.
Accordingly, we delete Section 271(1)(b) penalty in above terms.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10.02.2025