Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad V. Income Tax Offcer, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad, Aurangabad

ITA 102/PUN/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2837 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-04-2024
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-01-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.102/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2013-2014 Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, 1 st Floor, Sinchan Bhavan, Jalna Road, AURANGABAD. PIN – 431 005. Maharashtra.PAN AACCG9466F vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1 (1), Income Tax Office, 2 nd Floor, LIC Bldg., Cannought Place, Jalgaon Road, AURANGABAD. Maharashtra. PIN – 431 003. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of Hearing : 23.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 24.04.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1058040406(1), dated 17.11.2023, involving proceedings u/s.271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2 ITA.No.102/PUN./2024 2. Mr. Murkunde vehemently argued during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have rightly imposed the impugned sec.271(1)(b) penalty(ies) of Rs.10,000/- each on account of assessee’s default in not having complied with the assessing authority(ies) sec.142(1) notice dated 29.09.2020 and 09.02.2021, 19.02. 2021, 15.07. 2021 and 11.082021, respectively. He sought to buttress the point that impugned penalty provision has been inserted in the Act as a deterrent for non-complied assessee(s) and therefore, the same is liable to be upheld in the facts of the instant case once the taxpayer herein has not shown any reasonable cause explaining it’s non-cooperation. 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and Revenue’s vehement stand. We make it clear first of all that the assessee is a Government corporation viz., Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation. We note possibility of some communication gaps between the field authorities vis-à-vis decision makers could not be altogether ruled out, more particularly, in light of the fact that the assessee’s default period herein falling the peak of second wave of Covid-2019 pandemic outbreak during the period from September, 2020 to August, 2021, as the case may be. Coupled with this there is no indication in either of the learned lower authorities respective orders that the assessee’s alleged failure in not complying with sec.142(1) notice in any case prejudiced the corresponding 3 ITA.No.102/PUN./2024 assessment framed in it’s case. Faced with this situation, we treat the foregoing circumstances as a reasonable cause for the assessee’s alleged non-compliance to sec.142(1) notice during the course of assessment and delete the impugned penalty in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.04.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [RAMA KANTA PANDA] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 24 th April, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.