DEEPAK KUMAR KANJIBHAI PATEL, MUMBAI V. ITO 24(1)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 2743/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9856 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: E SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI , JM ITA NO. 2743 / MUM/20 17 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 ) SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR KANJIBHAI PATEL B - 503, 5 TH FLOOR SHIVALAYA HEIGHTS VEERA DESAI ROAD ANDH ERI(W), MUMBAI 400 058 VS. ITO 24(1)(5) - 523, PARIMAL CHAMBERS LALBAUG, MUMBAI 400 012 PAN/GIR NO. AYRPP4225F ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI E. SRIDHAR DATE OF HEARING 19 / 09/ 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24 / 09 /201 8 / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M) : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 36, MUMBAI DATED 17/01/2017 FOR A.Y.2010 - 11 IN THE MATTER OF IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT/ 2. NOBODY APP EARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF GIVING THE OPPORTUNITY. 3. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED DR AND FOUND THAT PENALTY OF RS.10,000/ - WAS IMPOSED BY AO FOR NON - COMPLIANCE WITH THE NOTICES. ITA NO. 2743/MUM/2017 SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR KANJIBHAI PATEL 2 4. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S. 271(1)(B). HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN STEELS (25 STC 211) OBSERVED THAT AN ORDER IMPOSING PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO CARRY OUT A STATUTORY OBLIGATION IS THE RESULT OF A - QUASI - CRIMINAL PROCEEDING, AND PENALTY IN DEFIANCE OF LAW OR WAS GUILT Y OF CONDUCT CONTUMACIOUS OR DISHONEST, OR ACTED IN CONSCIOUS DISREGARD OF ITS OBLIGATION. PENALTY WILL NOT ALSO BE IMPOSED MERELY BECAUSE I T IS LAWFUL TO DO SO. WHETHER PENALTY SHOULD BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO PERFORM A STATUTORY OBLIGATION IS A MATTER OF DISCRETION OF THE AUTHORITY TO BE EXERCISED JUDICIALLY AND ON A CONSIDERATION OF ALL THE RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES. EVEN IF A MINIMUM PENALTY IS PRESCRIBED, THE AUTHORITY COMPETENT TO IMPOSE THE PENALTY WILL BE JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING TO IMPOSE PENALTY, WHEN T HERE IS A TECHNICAL OR VENIAL BREACH OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OR WHERE THE BREACH FLOWS FROM A BONA FIDE BELIEF THAT THE OFFENDER IS NOT LIABLE TO ACT IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE STATUTE. 5. FROM THE RECORD WE FOUND THAT DURING THE PERIOD , CASES WE RE FIXED BY THE AO. ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN THE TOWN, HENCE HE COULD NOT PROVIDE DETAILS AND COMPILATION OF SUBMISSION BEFORE THE AO AT THE POINT OF TIME. HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENTLY ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE DETAILS AND ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS ALSO PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON - APPEARING BEFORE THE AO ON THE DATE OF NOTICE, WE DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE PENALTY SO IMPOSED U/S.271(1)(B) IF THE IT ACT. ITA NO. 2743/MUM/2017 SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR KANJIBHAI PATEL 3 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 24 / 09 /201 8 SD/ - ( RAM LAL NEGI ) SD/ - (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 24 / 09 /201 8 KARUNA SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDE R FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//