KAVITA CHAUDHARY,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), MEERUT

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal 1 Centre [NFAC] [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)] New Delhi, dated 16.08.2021 for assessment year 2011-12 in sustaining the penalty levied under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

In spite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was moved. The Assessing Officer passed penalty order under section 271(1)(b) of the Act on 5.11.2018 as the assessee had not made compliance to the notice issued under section 142(1) dated 28.09.2018, which was served on the assessee requiring the assessee to file relevant papers and details. However, it appears that the assessee did not comply to the said notice. The Assessing Officer levied penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act for non-compliance. 3. On appeal the ld. CIT (Appeals) sustained the penalty observing as under:- “The only issue in this appeal is the imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) for failure to comply with notices u/s. 142(1) on various dates i.e. on 15.05.2014, 14.08.2014, 02.09.2014. The appellant in his submission has stated that he was not at home and there was no authorized person to take the notice, there was no occasion to refuse to receive the notice. I have considered the submission ounting to R the appellant and perused the relevant Assessment Records. The A.O. had imposed penalty amounting to Rs.10,000/- on the appellant for not complying to notices u/s. 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, dated 28.09.2018 fixing hearing on 09.10.2018. The appellant in his grounds of appeals had taken the plea that no notices u/s. 148 /142(1) had been served on him. On verification from the records, it was found that the appellant had also not complied to show cause notices u/s. 271(1)(b) issued on 28.09.2018. The appellant it appears is a habitual 2

The assessee could not prove that there was compliance or that there was no compliance before us with evidences. The assessee could not prove any reasonable cause for non- compliance of notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 28.09.2018. Therefore, we see no infirmity in the order passed by the authorities below. The ground raised by the assessee is dismissed.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.