JASMINE CONTRACTORS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), FARIDABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) was wrongly imposed as the assessee had complied with the notice before the due date. Therefore, the penalty was directed to be deleted.
What were the facts?
The assessee was issued a notice under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with a notice dated 24.09.2018, which fixed a hearing for 08.10.2018. However, the assessee had already filed the required documents on 04.10.2018, four days before the scheduled hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(b) is leviable when the assessee has complied with the notice before the specified date.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: C: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
Date of Hearing : 01.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. This appeal has been filed against the order of Ld. NFAC, Delhi dated 28.01.2023 for AY 2016-17.
We have heard arguments of both the sides from the penalty order we note that the Assessing Officer imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the I.T Act 1961 (for short the ‘ Act’) of Rs. 10,000/- on account of non compliance of notice dated 24.09.2018 wherein the assessee was called to appear on 08.10.2018. From top para at page 2 of assessment order dated 06.12.2018 u/s. 143(3) of the Act for AY 2016-17 we note that the Assessing Officer mentioned about the issuance of said notice dated 24.09.2018 wherein date of hearing was fixed on 08.10.2018 and in the same para Assessing Officer noted that on 04.10.2018 the assessee company has filed copies of the bank book along with names of the share holder to whom shares were allotted during the year. In this back drop we are unable to agree with the conclusion of authorities below imposing and upholding penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act on the assessee for non compliance of notice dated 24.09.2018 which in fact was replied by the assessee four days before the fix date on 04.10.2018. Accordingly, sole grievance of assessee is allowed and the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the impugned penalty.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 04.08.2023.
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
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026