Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (1) TMI 1713

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances. Even if a minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act, or where the breach flows from a bonafide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute.” - Thus penalty deleted - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A. Nos. 4743, 4744, 4745, 4746, 4747, 4748 & 4749/DEL/2013 - - - Dated:- 30-1-2014 - SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Petitioner : Sh. A.K. Srivastava, CA For the Responde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... made under section 143(3) and not under section 144 of the IT Act. It means that subsequent compliance in the assessment proceedings was considered as good compliance and the defaults committed earlier were ignoring by the AO. Hence, the penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) could not be levied. 6.1 Ld. DR on the other hand relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. We find that in these cases the AO has asked explanation of 36 questions and assessee was given only 7 days time. In these circumstances, in our considered opinion, the assessee was not given proper opportunity and in the same situation this tribunal in ITA No. 4239/Del/2013 in the case of Shivaansh Advertising and Pu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essee. 8.1 Furthermore, we find that Hon ble Apex Court in a decision rendered by a larger Bench comprising of three of their Lordships in the case of Hindustan Steel vs. State of Orissa in 83 ITR 26 held that that An order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi-criminal proceedings, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged either acted deliberately in defiance of law or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest, or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation. Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates