ROSY,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 3, PANCHKULA

The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld.CIT(A)’] dated 22.03.2023 pertaining to 2013-14 to 2016- 17 assessment year.

The assessee is aggrieved in all these appeals in respect of confirmation of penalty levied by the Assessing Officer ( in short ‘the AO’) u/s 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in to 322/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 2 short ‘the Act’).

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the impugned penalties have been levied by the AO for non compliance of notices issued by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. The ld. counsel invited our attention to relevant part of the assessment order and submitted that the aforesaid notices were allegedly uploaded by the AO on the Income Tax Portal. That none of the notices were ever served upon the assessee. He has further submitted that even otherwise, the assessee is a divorcee lady living all alone with his minor son. That she was cheated by her husband who was already married to another lady prior to getting married with the assessee.

We find justification in the aforesaid submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. The assessee has duly explained her inability to comply with the notices issued by the AO for want of proper service of the same upon her. The impugned penalty levied by the AO is, therefore, not justified and the same is, accordingly, ordered to be deleted in all the captioned appeals.

All the appeals of the assessee are allowed.