Satywan, Panipat V. ITO WARD - 4, Panipat

ITA 642/DEL/2021

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Satywan, the proprietor of Raj Khad Bhandar, against a penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panipat, under section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with a notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalty was contested on the grounds that the notice was not directly received by Satywan but by his illiterate parents, which led to non-compliance. The Tribunal, after hearing the arguments and reviewing the circumstances, concluded that there was a reasonable cause for the non-compliance, thus allowing the appeal and deleting the penalty.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 121342 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 16-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREY JAIN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 147; 144; 273B; 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 642/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Satywan, Prop. Raj Khad Bhandar Near Bus Stand Mandi Madlauda, Panipat, Haryana-132113 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panipat, Haryana-132103 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. EUHPS7375M Assessee by : Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Sh. Shrey Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 17.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 31.08.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 06.03.2021. 2. Following grounds have been raised by the assessee: “1. That the order of ld. CIT(A) in upholding the penalty order u/s 271(1)(b) of the Assessing Officer is against the principals of natural justice, illegal, void & uncalled for.” 3. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 4. The AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-compliance of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 22.11.2018. The assessment in this case has been ITA No. 642/Del/2021 Satywan 2 completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was submitted that the notices have been received by the parents of the assessee and the same have not been given to the assessee as the parents are illiterate. 5. Section 273B of the Act provides that penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed, if it is proved that there was a reasonable cause for the said failure of the assessee to comply with the provisions of Section 271(1)(b). In this case, we find that non-appearance of the assessee before the AO was caused by non-receipt of the notice. This in our considered opinion can be construed as reasonable cause u/s 273B for non-compliance by the assessee. Hence, the penalty levied is hereby deleted. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 31/08/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (C. M. Garg) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 31/08/2023 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR