GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFCER, WARD-1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the period of non-compliance coincided with the peak of the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic, and there was no indication that the non-compliance prejudiced the assessment. Therefore, these circumstances constituted a reasonable cause for non-compliance.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, failed to comply with Section 142(1) notices issued by the Income Tax Officer. Penalties were imposed under Section 271(1)(b) for this non-compliance.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for non-compliance with Section 142(1) notices, and if the non-compliance prejudiced the assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1058040406(1), dated 17.11.2023, involving proceedings u/s.271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
2 ITA.No.102/PUN./2024 2. Mr. Murkunde vehemently argued during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have rightly imposed the impugned sec.271(1)(b) penalty(ies) of Rs.10,000/- each on account of assessee’s default in not having complied with the assessing authority(ies) sec.142(1) notice dated 29.09.2020 and 09.02.2021, 19.02. 2021, 15.07. 2021 and 11.082021, respectively. He sought to buttress the point that impugned penalty provision has been inserted in the Act as a deterrent for non-complied assessee(s) and therefore, the same is liable to be upheld in the facts of the instant case once the taxpayer herein has not shown any reasonable cause explaining it’s non-cooperation.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s vehement stand. We make it clear first of all that the assessee is a Government corporation viz., Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation. We note possibility of some communication gaps between the field authorities vis-à-vis decision makers could not be altogether ruled out, more particularly, in light of the fact that the assessee’s default period herein falling the peak of second wave of Covid-2019 pandemic outbreak during the period from September, 2020 to August, 2021, as the case may be. Coupled with this there is no indication in either of the learned lower authorities respective orders that the assessee’s alleged failure in not complying with sec.142(1) notice in any case prejudiced the corresponding
3 ITA.No.102/PUN./2024 assessment framed in it’s case. Faced with this situation, we treat the foregoing circumstances as a reasonable cause for the assessee’s alleged non-compliance to sec.142(1) notice during the course of assessment and delete the impugned penalty in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.04.2024.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(b)
- Navanitbhai Gordhanbhai Bhuva, Surat vs ITO, Ward 3(3)(1), SuratITA 1195/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Navanitbhai Gordhanbhai Bhuva, Surat vs ITO, Ward 3(3)(1), SuratITA 1194/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Navanitbhai Gordhanbhai Bhuva, Surat vs ITO, Ward 3(3)(1), SuratITA 1193/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Laxmi Narain Kesarwani, Delhi vs DCIT, Central Circle-20, New DelhiITA 4432/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Laxminarain Kesarwani, Delhi vs DCIT, Central Circel-20, New DelhiITA 4431/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026