आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कु मार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.659/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sh. Singanallur Subraman Radhakrishnan No.27, Street No.1, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore-641 018 बनाम/ V s. DCIT National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./P AN /GI R No . AW NP S -3 8 5 1 -Q (अपीलाथ$/Appellant) : (%&थ$ / Respondent) अपीलाथ$ की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri R.Vijayaraghavan (Advocate ) –Ld.AR %&थ$ की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) – Ld.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18-01-2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 18-01-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by confirmation of penalty of Rs.40,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The impugned order has been passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 29-06-2022 in the matter of penalty levied by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] vide order dated 06-01-2022. 2. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen and was not well versed with e-proceedings. Therefore, the assessee could ITA No.659/Chny/2022 - 2 - not respond to notices issued by Ld. AO. The Ld. Sr. DR justified levy of penalty on the facts of the case. 3. From the penalty order, it could be seen that pursuant to revision of order u/s 263, notices u/s 142(1) was issued to the assessee from time to time, however, the same remained un-responded. The assessee neither made compliance nor sought any adjournment. Accordingly, the assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 263 r.w.s. 144B on 13.09.2021. Consequently, impugned penalty was levied u/s 271(1)(b) for Rs.40,000/- on the ground that the assessee deliberately avoided compliance of notices issued u/s 142(1). The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the levy of penalty against which the assessee is in further appeal before us 4. We find that the assessee is a senior citizen and it was quite possible that the assessee was not well versed with electronic proceedings. Further, the proceedings have taken place during lockdown situation arising out of Covid-19 Pandemic which supports the case of the assessee. Therefore, these facts would not suggest that the assessee deliberately avoided compliances to notices. Hence, it is not a fit case for levy of penalty. By deleting the same, we allow the appeal. 5. The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 18 th January, 2023 Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा12 /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद9 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई / Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 18-01-2023 DS ITA No.659/Chny/2022 - 3 - आदेश की Vितिलिप अ 6ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु /CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF