GANESH AGRI PROPERTIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3034/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 July 2016AY 2008-093 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 found that the assessee had a reasonable cause for the delay in providing the voluminous submissions due to the nature of the seized materials. Therefore, the AO was not justified in imposing the penalty.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to provide submissions and explanations in response to notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the penalty imposed by the AO for this non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether there was a reasonable cause for the assessee's non-compliance with the AO's notices, justifying the imposition of penalty.

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, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, Shri Neil Philip
For Respondent: Shri Neil Philip

सुनवाई की तायीख / : 20/07/2016 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : 27.7.2016 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. SHARMA, A. M.: This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 52, Mumbai (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 19.02.2015 for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2008-09, in the matter of imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) amounting to Rs.20,000/-.

(A.Y. 2008-09) Ganesh Agri Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT 2. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. In this case the AO had levied penalty of Rs.20,000/- for assessee’s failure to file submission and explanation for non compliance of the notice. By the impugned order CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO.

3.

We have considered rival contentions and found that notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the act was issued and served upon the assessee on 16.08.2010 fixing the date of compliance on 16.08.2010. The next date of hearing fixed at 06.09.2010. The assessee did not have a copy of statements recorded u/s 132(4) of the act. The same was provided on 06.09.2010. The assessee submitted explanations with necessary supporting/evidences running into 18000 pages in respect of the various seized/impounded materials even prior to 19.11.2010. Due to the voluminous nature of the explanations, the effort and time required by the assessee to compile the same cannot be denied. The assessee, in its reply filed in response to the show cause notice has stated that explanations with necessary supporting/evidences had been submitted and there is no malafide intention on the part of the assessee to not provide the details necessary for assessment. All the requisite details were filed by assessee by mid-december 2010.

(A.Y. 2008-09) Ganesh Agri Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT 4. In view of the above we found that there was a reasonable cause for non compliance with the notice issued by AO within the stipulated time. Accordingly AO was not justified in imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27 July, 2016 Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (R.C. SHARMA) न्मायमक सदस्म / Judicial Member रेखा सदस्म / Accountant Member भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated : 27.07.2016 Ps. Ashwini आदेश की प्रनिलऱपि अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent 2. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A) 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT - concerned 4. ववबागीम प्रयतयनधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड पाईर / Guard File 6. आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

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 →