ROSY,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 3, PANCHKULA
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
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
ITA Nos.319 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.
That her estranged husband had made false complaints with
the Income Tax Authorities to harass the assessee. That the
assessee, on the one hand was trying to cope up and look
after her only son and on the other hand is defending the
complaints filed by her husband. That the non compliance
of the notices issued by the AO was not intentional but due
to the fact that the aforesaid notices were not served upon
the assessee and further the assessee being a divorcee lady
could not look into the Income Tax Portal for the aforesaid
reasons.
ITA Nos.319 to 322/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 3
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.
Order pronounced on 15 t h February,2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
(VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु�त/ CIT 3. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड�फाईल/ Guard File 5.
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
