Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 39 - AT - Income TaxCondonation of delay - Penalty under section 271(1)(c) and under section 271D - delay in filing appeal - whether it cannot be said that non-filing of the appeal is only due to misplacement of the record but it may also be due to additions agreed to by the assessee? - Held that:- The assessee’s explanations in the assessment proceedings would therefore be the basis for levy of penalty under section 271D. The assessee would, therefore required assessment records to submit its explanation during penalty proceedings under section 271D and therefore the assessee’s contention that the assessment records were not required to represent in 271D proceedings is not sustainable. When the assessee had the assessment records for representing in the proceedings under section 271D, it cannot be said that it was prevented by sufficient cause to file appeal against the order under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act or in appeal against the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) due to misplacement of file is not maintainable at least till the proceedings under section 271D got concluded. The assessee did not represent before the A.O. during the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and has filed the appeal against the same also with delay. The assessee, has therefore, not been vigilant in challenging the re-assessment proceedings as well as the penalty proceedings. The assessee’s explanation is common for all the appeals proceedings. Therefore, the CIT(A)’s order for refusing to condone the delay of 217 days in filing the appeal against order under section 143(3) read with section 147 and 29 days and 81 days in filing of the appeals against the penalty proceedings mentioned above is upheld. - Decided against assessee
|