Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH’B’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR
PER BENCH :
Both the above appeals have been filed by the different Assessees against the similar order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Chandigarh dt. 24/04/2017.
Since the issues raised in both the above appeals are common therefore
they are being decided together for the sake of convenience. We shall take ITA
No. 1102/Chd/2017 as a lead case.
The Assessee has raised following grounds in ITA No. 1102/CHD/2017:
That the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1 is not a speaking order, is erroneous, arbitrary, opposed to law and facts of the case.
That the Ld. CIT(A)-1 has erred in law as well as on facts in levying a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 271(1)(b) without correctly appreciating the fact that the non attendance of assessment of assessment proceedings was due to some reasonable circumstances.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was framed u/s
143(3) of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(b) were initiated for non-
compliance of notices u/s 143(2)/142(1) of the Act.
The Ld. CIT(A) fixed the hearing on 20.04.2017, but nobody attended on
that date. The notice of hearing dated 10.04.2017 for 20.04.2017 was duly
served on the assessee on 18.04.2017 as per confirmation of the Notice Server.
No adjournment was sought for and no written submission was filed before the
Ld. CIT(A). Hence, it was presumed that the assessee does not want to say
anything and the appeal was decided on the basis of material available on
record.
Since the assessee remained non- cooperative the penalty of Rs. 10,000/-
imposed was confirmed.
Before us the assessee submitted that the notice was received by the
watchman who has defaulted in handing over the notice to the assessee. It was
pleaded that given an opportunity relevant submissions would be made before
the Ld. CIT(A).
We find that the penalty has been confirmed as the assessee could not
attend the proceedings and the abstinence from the proceeding is due to a
reasonable cause, hence we remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to
accord one opportunity and to consider the submission of the assessee.
And we believe that the assessee will not belay the confidence reposed upon
and will not abuse the opportunity given while submitting compliance before
the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. 8.
Order pronounced in the open court.
Sd/- Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated : 05/03/2018
AG
Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. The CIT 5. The DR