SHIV DUTT LOHIYA,AGRA vs. CIT APPEAL, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 394/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 February 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (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 held that the non-cooperation of the assessee was likely due to circumstances beyond their control, such as lockdowns during the pandemic. Therefore, it was deemed appropriate to delete the penalties.

What were the facts?

The assessee's twin appeals were for assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16, directed against orders imposing penalties under section 271(1)(b). The penalties were levied for non-compliance with section 142(1) notices during the Covid-19 pandemic.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under section 271(1)(b) was justified given the circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic and potential impact on the assessee's compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, “DB” AGRA

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

Hearing: 07.02.2025Pronounced: 07.02.2025

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals for assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16 are directed against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders dated 17.09.2024 and 01.10.2024 passed in DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1068721103(1) and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1069292266(1); respectively involving proceedings under section 271 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.

3.

It transpires during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that both the learned lower authorities have levied Rs.10,000/- penalty under section 271(1)(b) on the ground that the assessee had failed to comply not only the Assessing Officer’s section 142(1) notice(s) dated 15th, 25th and 31st December, 2021, but also no explanation had come during penalty proceedings as well.

4.

We are of the considered view in this factual backdrop that the above stated section 142(1) notices had admittedly been sent to the assessee during Covid Pandemic Outbreak involving various lockdowns and restrictions and, therefore, his non-cooperation during the course of hearing scrutiny could indeed taken as on account of circumstances beyond his control. We accordingly deem it as a fit case to delete the impugned penalty in very terms.

5.

Same order to follow in the assessee’s latter appeal since involving identical set of facts.

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 →