← All Phrases

“reasonable cause”

PenaltySection 273BSection 273B7,285 judgments

The decision most relied on for reasonable cause is Ashok Pai v. CIT (292 ITR 11), cited in 812 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reasonable cause

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court
451
citing judgments

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy
7 SCC 123 · 1998 · Supreme Court
368
citing judgments

The Supreme Court outlines the principles for condoning delay in filing appeals, stating that a litigant's lapse is not always a bar if the explanation is bona fide and not a dilatory strategy. Courts should show utmost consideration to suitors and prioritize substantial justice unless the delay is deliberately to gain time.

Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT
115 TTJ 419 · 2008 · ITAT
292
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with a notice issued under Section 142(1) is not leviable when the assessee demonstrates a reasonable cause for such non-compliance. The decision defines what constitutes 'reasonable cause' in this context.

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT
280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court
182
citing judgments

The expression "sufficient cause" for condoning delay in filing appeals must receive a liberal and purposive construction. This approach aims to advance substantial justice, which is of paramount importance.

CIT v. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai and Ors.
153 ITR 596 · 1985 · High Court
171
citing judgments

Where a reasonable cause for delay in filing an appeal exists, the period of delay may not be a relevant factor for condonation. The court has condoned even substantial delays, such as nearly 21 years, based on the presence of a reasonable cause.

People Education and Economic Development Society (PEEDS) v. ITO
100 ITD 87 · 2006 · ITAT
121
citing judgments

When substantial justice and procedural technicalities are in conflict, especially in cases involving non-deliberate delay, the cause of substantial justice must be prioritized. The opposing party cannot claim a vested right to benefit from injustice due to such delays.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd.
262 ITR 260 · 2003 · High Court
121
citing judgments

Journal entries for accepting or repaying loans and deposits, without any actual cash transaction, do not violate the provisions of Section 269SS or Section 269T of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, such transactions do not attract penalties under Section 271D or Section 271E.

Judgments citing reasonable cause

Bharat Keshavlal Shah, Pune vs. Dy. CIT Circle 5, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 799/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.799/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bharat Keshavlal Shah, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5, Pune. 27, Bharat Pushpa, Sujay Garden, Mukundnagar, Pune- 411037. Pan : Adxps3821M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Jha Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.12.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Assessee Requests For Condonation Of Delay Of 62 Days In Filing The Appeal Since There Was A Reasonable Cause On The Part Of The Assessee In Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee For Want Of Prosecution On The Ground That The Assessee Had Not Filed Any Submissions & Hence Was Not Interested In Pursuing The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 56(2)(vii)

following grounds of appeal :- “1. The assessee requests for condonation of delay of 62 days in filing the appeal since there was a reasonable cause on the part of the assessee in not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing

Zoyeb Hyderabadwala, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 240/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 240/Viz/2024 (धििाधरणिरध/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Zoyeb Hyderabadwala V. Ito – Ward – 1(2) 27-32-9, Ground Floor Direct Taxes Building, Mvp Double Road 75 Feet Road, Visakhapatnam – 530001 Andhra Pradesh Besides Gayatri College, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan : Aaapz3387M] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलार्/ Appellant) (प्र्/ Respondent) यरद्त्य्पयतय्यिध/ Assessee Represented By : Shri C. Sanjeev Rao, Ar र्जसय्पयतय्यिध/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar सु्व्ईसम्पहो्ेय्यतयि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 08.08.2024 घोषण्य्त्र्ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri S Balakrishnan: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

books of accounts after 26.11.2018 for submission to the Chartered Accountant for completion of the audit. Ld.AR pleaded that there is a sufficient reasonable cause for the assessee for not filing the audit report under section 44AB within the time limit prescribed. He therefore pleaded to delete the penalty ... commenced after 26.11.2018 only. Section 273B provides that no penalty thereby imposable on the assessee, if the assessee proves that there is a reasonable cause for the said failure. However, assessee was not able to submit any evidences to show that assessee is having a reasonable cause showing that

Shweta Singh, Siliguri vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 8

ITA 14/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.14/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shweta Singh ………. Appellant 204, Tower No. 15, Mig Colony, Uttarayan, Matigara, Siliguri-734010. (Pan: Bndps2756J) Vs. Income Tax Officer ………… Respondent Ward-2(3), Siliguri, W.B. Appearances By: Shri Vikash Surana, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Addl. Cit Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 26.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 04.09.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 06.11.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S. 143(3)/144 Of The Act By Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Siliguri Dated 11.12.2017. I.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2024 Shweta Singh, Ay : 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

adjudication. Needless to say that assessee should be given adequate opportunity of being heard and assessee to also avoid adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Page 4 of 5 I.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2024 Shweta Singh, AY : 2015-16 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Ramalingam Karthikeya Narayanan, Madurai vs. DCIT, Ncc-2, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1684/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1684/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ramalingam Karthikeya Narayanan, Deputy Commissioner Of 2/30, Ponmeni Periyavar Street, V. Income Tax, Sakthivelammal Nagar, Non-Corporate Circle -2, Arasaradi H.O Madurai South, Madurai. Madurai – 625 016. [Pan: Adrpn-5099-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. A. Nikitha, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2024

For Appellant: Ms. A. Nikitha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

completion of assessment, ought to have deleted the penalty in toto. 4. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that there was a reasonable cause in not filing the Audit Report within the due date as contemplated under the provisions of the IT Act, 1961, ought to have deleted ... that no penalty u/s.271B can be levied if the Audit report is filed before the completion of assessment and there being a reasonable cause in not filing the Audit Report. 6. Any other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing. 3. Brief facts relevant for levy

The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Producers Co-Op Mkg Society Limited, Trichy vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Trichy

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 1583/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1581/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1582/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1583/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Dcit बनाम/ Producers Co-Op Mkg Society Limited Circle-1(1) 171, Lalgudi, Trichy. Vs. Tiruchirapalli-621 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaat-0204-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate From Erode) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate from Erode) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271B

financial accounts and completion of audit by the department. In such a scenario, the explanation of the assessee is to be accepted as a reasonable cause. 4. The various decisions of Tribunal support the case of the assessee. The coordinate bench in the case of M/s Balaji Logistics (ITA No.2248/Chny/2019

The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Producers Co-Op Mkg Society Limited, Trichy vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Trichy

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 1582/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1581/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1582/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1583/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Dcit बनाम/ Producers Co-Op Mkg Society Limited Circle-1(1) 171, Lalgudi, Trichy. Vs. Tiruchirapalli-621 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaat-0204-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate From Erode) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate from Erode) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271B

financial accounts and completion of audit by the department. In such a scenario, the explanation of the assessee is to be accepted as a reasonable cause. 4. The various decisions of Tribunal support the case of the assessee. The coordinate bench in the case of M/s Balaji Logistics (ITA No.2248/Chny/2019

The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Producers Co-Op Mkg Society Limited, Trichy vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Trichy

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 1581/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1581/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1582/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1583/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रण वष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Dcit बनाम/ Producers Co-Op Mkg Society Limited Circle-1(1) 171, Lalgudi, Trichy. Vs. Tiruchirapalli-621 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaat-0204-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate From Erode) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate from Erode) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271B

financial accounts and completion of audit by the department. In such a scenario, the explanation of the assessee is to be accepted as a reasonable cause. 4. The various decisions of Tribunal support the case of the assessee. The coordinate bench in the case of M/s Balaji Logistics (ITA No.2248/Chny/2019