Saroj, New Delhi V. ITO WARD - 38(2), New Delhi

ITA 7281/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5914 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 142(1); 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI SMC B ENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 7281/DEL/2019 [ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11] SMT. SAROJ VS. THE I.T.O B-8/15, SECTOR 15, ROHINI WARD 38(2) NEW DELHI - 110085 NEW DELHI PAN: BPVPS 6722 J [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 15.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.09.2021 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GAUTAM JAIN, ADV . SHRI LALIT MOHAN, C.A. REVENUE BY : SHRI R.K. GUPTA, SR. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS] 13, NEW DELH I DATED 24.06.2019 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2 2. THE SOLITARY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT T HE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'T HE ACT' FOR SHORT] BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT R ETURN FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSES SMENT AND, ACCORDINGLY, STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND SERV ED UPON THE ASSESSEE. NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FO R THE THREE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, F INAL OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN VIDE NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT DATED 10.11 .2017, WHICH ALSO REMAINED UNCOMPLIED WITH. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO FRAME ASSESSMENT ORDER EX-PARTY U/S 144 OF THE ACT. PENAL PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT WER E SEPARATELY INITIATED. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271 (1)(B) OF THE ACT, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN Y REPLY WAS FILED. AGAIN, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS LEFT WITH NO CHOIC E BUT TO LEVY PENALTY OF RS.10,000/-. 3 5. THE ASSESSEE AGITATED MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A). THOUGH THERE WAS A DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL, IN HER REQUEST FO R CONDONATION OF DELAY, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT SHE WAS UNDER A BON AFIDE BELIEF THAT HER EARLIER CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WOULD TAKE ALL NEC ESSARY STEPS TO PROTECT HER INTEREST. THIS REASON DID NOT FIND ANY FAVOUR WITH THE LD. CIT(A) WHO DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY AND ON MERITS, AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CONFIRMED THE P ENALTY OF RS.10,000/-. 6. BEFORE ME, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NO T ADDUCE ANY EVIDENCE/REASON FOR NOT ATTENDING THE ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS NOR PENAL PROCEEDINGS. ON CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN TOTALITY, I DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 7281/DEL/2019 IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.09. 2021 IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE REPRESENTATIVES. SD/- [N.K. BILLAIYA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021. 4 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) ASST. REGISTRAR, 5. DR ITAT, NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 15.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER