TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 1010X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances of the case and in law the penalty deserves to be deleted, Hence, it is prayed to your honour to do the justice and delete the penalty on the ground of natural justice. 3. Your appellant reserves his right to add, amend, alter and/ or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal. 2 None appeared before us on behalf of the assessee and instead written submissions have been filed. Considering the nature of issue involved, we, therefore, decided to dispose of the appeal in the light of these written submissions after hearing the learned Departmental Representative. 3 Adverting to ground no.1 in the appeal, facts, in brief , as per relevant orders are that return declaring income of ₹ 12,50,85 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hi. If is the contention of the AR that there was no malafide intention on the part of the Assessee to not to comply with the notices. It has thus been requested that the penalty be deleted. 5. I have carefully considered the matter. I do not find any merit in the submission of the Assessee as recorded in the Statement of Facts , Repeated opportunities had been provided to the Assessee vide notices dated 27-09-2007, 21-07-2008 and 06-10-2008 yet, there was no compliance on part of the Assessee or his AR. As regards the notice dated 27-09-2007, vide which the hearing was fixed on 11-10-2007, the contention that the AR had met the AO and no remark was put on the order sheet, is not supported by any evidence. There was no compliance to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or making compliance demanded by the IT Department, hence not able to attend. 3 Show cause notice for penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act 06-10-08 13-10-08 Due to ill health, the appellant, who is having age of more than 70 years, was hospitalized and not able to convey the notice to his new representative Shri Pradeep Kumar Singhi. In the light of these details, while relying upon decisions in the case of Swarnaben M Khanna Others vs. DCIT [2010] 132 TTJ (Ahd) (UO) 1 and Akhil Bhart iya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs. Assistant Director of Income-tax,115 TTJ 419 (Del), the assessee submit ted that the complete details having been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lained before the ld. CIT(A) that first notice issued on 27.9.2007 intimated that the case was selected for scrutiny. Sri Kiranbhai Shah, AR of the appellant, attended the hearing. He had been informed that this was formal notice for hearing and the AO did not mark his attendance. The ld. CIT(A) did not verify these submissions nor called for any report from the AO. Even otherwise, the AO did not pursue this notice since second notice of hearing was issued almost one year thereafter. As regards second notice dated 21.7.2008 , the assessee submitted that the assesse was in search of new counsel ,earlier having left. For not responding to show cause notice, the assessee pleaded that he being seventy years old was hospitalized and could not at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
