Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Prakash Dalichand Bagrecha Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-11 (4) , Ahmedabad

2016 (3) TMI 1100 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

Penalty levied u/s.271(1)(b) - non-appearance of assessee in response to notices issued u/s.142(1) - Held that:- In the present case, we find that the assessment has been framed u/s.143(3) of the Act and further the income returned by the assessee has been accepted by A.O. without making any additions. We further find that the Co-ordinate Bench in case of Priyank K. Shah vs. ITO (2013 (7) TMI 1023 - ITAT AHMEDABAD) has held that when assessment order is passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act and not u/s. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/Ahd/2011 - Dated:- 10-3-2016 - Kul Bharat (Judicial Member) And Anil Chaturvedi (Accountant Member) For the Appellant : K. M. Mehta, A.R. For the Respondent : Sonia Kumar, Sr. D.R. ORDER Anil Chaturvedi (Accountant Member) This appeal filed by assessee is against the order of CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmedabad, dated August 12, 2011 for the assessment year 2008-09 confirming penalty levied u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act. 2. The relevant facts as culled out from the materials on record are as under: 3. Assessee is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(1) of the Act which remained uncomplied and assessee did not also furnish any written reply. He, therefore, held that on account of failure to comply to the notices u/s.142(1) of the Act assessee was liable for penalty u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act and accordingly vide order dated 12.10.2010 levied penalty of ₹ 20,000/- u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 12.08.2011 (in Appeal No. CIT(A) -XVI/ITO/Wd.-1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

entative had indeed appeared before the A.O. and furnished replies in part compliance to the notice and thus it cannot be said that there was non compliance on part of the assessee. He also placed reliance on the decision in the case of M/s. Rang International vs. ITO in ITA No.2543/Ahd/2011, order dated 15.05.2015 and placed on record the copy of the aforesaid order. He therefore submitted that the penalty be deleted. Ld. D.R., on the other hand, supported the order of Assessing Officer and ld. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version