SH. NARJINDER SINGH SEKHON,PATIALA vs. ITO, W-5, PATIALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 232/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 May 2018AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the interest of justice would be served by giving the assessee an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to consider the assessee's submissions on additions and his inability to comply with notices.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a retired government officer with chronic health issues, failed to comply with notices from the Assessing Officer due to his ill health and memory loss. The CIT(A) confirmed additions and penalties, citing the lack of furnishing details to the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's failure to comply with AO's notices due to ill health warrants a fresh opportunity to present his case. Whether additions and penalties should be reconsidered based on the assessee's health condition.

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, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA

For Respondent: Ms. Deepika Mohan, JCIT
Hearing: 17.05.2018Pronounced: 17.05.2018

Per Bench:

The present bunch of appeals has been preferred by the

assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income

Tax(Appeals)-3, Ludhiana [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] dated

26.12.2017.

ITA Nos.225 to 234/Chd/2018 Shri Narjinder Singh Sekhn, Patiala 2

2.

ITA Nos. 225 to 229/Chd/2018 are against the quantum

additions, whereas, ITA Nos. 230 to 234/Chd/2018 are against the

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

'the Act').

3.

In all the appeals, it has been pleaded by the assessee that he

is a retired government officer and is an old chronic patient of

diabetic and has been on regular treatment for the same for the last

25 years. That due to his bad health, he could not attend the

proceedings before the Assessing officer and, hence, could not

comply with the notices issued by the Assessing officer from time to

time. That due to his disease, he has also become short of memory.

It has been further stated that the additions made by the Assessing

officer were not justified as the assessee has reasonable explanation

in respect of the additions made by Assessing officer on account of

interest. That the assessee had made submissions before the CIT(A),

however, the CIT(A) did not look into the submissions of the

assessee and confirmed the additions and the penalty on the grounds

that the assessee could not furnish the relevant details / explanation

to the Assessing officer.

4.

After going through the records and the impugned orders of the

Assessing officer as well as of the CIT(A), we are of the view that

the interest of justice will be well served, if the assessee is given an

opportunity to present his case before the Assessing officer. The

Assessing officer will not only consider the submissions of the

assessee regarding the impugned additions but also the plea of the

ITA Nos.225 to 234/Chd/2018 Shri Narjinder Singh Sekhn, Patiala 3

assessee regarding his inability to comply with the notices and then to decide the matters afresh. All the above appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 17.05.2018 Rkk Copy to: • The Appellant • The Respondent • The CIT • The CIT(A) • The DR

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 →