JAYASAKTHI KNIT WEAR,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), TIRUPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1755/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 November 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's plea of depression and business losses. However, it directed the deletion of Rs.30,000/- from the penalty, confirming a penalty of Rs.10,000/- as sufficient.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Jayasakthi Knit Wear, appealed against the order confirming a penalty of Rs.40,000/- for not responding to notices. The assessee claimed depression due to business losses as a reason for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty imposed for non-compliance with notices is justified given the assessee's plea of depression and business losses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA

Hearing: 26.09.2024Pronounced: 13.11.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter in short ‘the Ld.CIT(A)’), NFAC, Delhi, dated 19.04.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter in short ‘AY’) 2016-17.

2.

The main grievance of the assessee is against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) confirming penalty for violation of sec.271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short "the Act") thereby confirming levy of penalty of Rs.40,000/- for not responding to notices (four times). The only plea of the assessee is that the assessee got into depression since the assessee suffered huge loss in the business and therefore, couldn’t respond to the notices of the AO and has filed an affidavit pleading for leniency.

3.

Having gone through the contents of the affidavit, we are of the view that penalty of Rs.10,000/- would suffice for not responding to the notices and therefore, we direct the Ld.CIT(A) to delete penalty of Rs.30,000/- and confirm penalty of Rs.10,000/-

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.

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 →