9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - II, New Delhi dated 14/05/2013 in appeal no. 39/ 2011-12 for AY 2009-10 by which penalty order dated 17.06.2011 imposing penalty of Rs. 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) has been upheld. 2. Although, the assessee has raised as many as 7 grounds in this appeal but except gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thus ; "3. Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) has been levied for the assessee's failure to comply with the notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act alongwith the detailed questionnaire, fixing the case for hearing to 18.11.2010. At the very outset the Ld. AR submitted less than 10 days were given to the comply with the notice and therefore penalty u/s 271(1)(b) was not justified. It was submitted under similar c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s issued on 8.11.2010 along with the detailed questionnaire fixing the case for hearing to 18.11.2010. It is not mentioned in the penalty order when the notice has been served upon the assessee. Even it is presumed that the notice was served on the next dates or within two or three days, the period left with the assessee to comply with the notice was too short to be held as a reasonable period for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation it cannot be held that the assessee did not comply with the notice dated 8.11.2010 of the AO and hence penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act cannot be imposed. The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that when the assessee is not cooperating with the assessment proceedings then the assessing officer has no option but to comply assessment u/s 144 of the Act and in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
