TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 710X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 13, New Delhi, [in short learned CIT(A)], for assessment years 2005-06, 2010-11 and 2012-13 respectively, in relation to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) for non-compliance of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Being identical facts and circumstances in all these appeals, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order. The grounds in all the three appeals are identical, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised in ITA No. 5909/Del/2016, for assessment year 2005-06 are reproduced as under: 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant s case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in fact and in law in upholding penalty u/s 271 (1 )(b) of the Income tax Act, 1961 by disregarding decision of judicial Hon ble ITAT that no penalty u/s 271 (1 )(b) is to be impose, when assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) instead of 144 of the Act, which implies that subsequent compliances made by the appellant were considered as good compliance. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant s case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not comply with the same. Alternatively, the assessee also prayed that the assessment was completed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Act and not under Section 144 of the Act, which implies that subsequent compliance by the assessee in the assessment proceedings has been considered as good compliance and hence, no penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act is required to be levied. The assessee filed detailed submissions before the learned CIT(A), which have been reproduced in paras 4 and 5 of the impugned order. The learned CIT(A), however, rejected the contention of the assessee that there was reasonable cause for failure to comply with the notices. Learned CIT(A) also rejected the contention of the assessee that show-cause notice for levy of penalty of notice was not received by the assessee. Third ground of the assessee is that the assessment was not completed under Section 144 of the Act and, therefore, the delayed compliance should be treated as good compliance, was also rejected by the learned CIT(A). The relevant finding of the learned CIT(A) are reproduced as under : 6. The above submissions -have been carefully considered. The appellant has firstly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant's argument that it was unable to comply with the notices dated 11.12.2014, 12.01.2015 and 16.01.2015 because of the AO's delay in providing it with copy of satisfaction note and seized documents (provided on 11.12.2014) is also far-fetched. The appellant is held to have defaulted in its compliance to the notices u/s 142(1) without reasonable cause. Hence, ground of appeal no.l is dismissed. 7. Ground of appeal no.2 pertains to the appellant's plea that it was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The same is not borne out by the record. The appellant has claimed that it did not receive the show-cause notice of penalty u/s 271(l)(b), dated 16.01.2015. No reason has been given for the alleged non-receipt of the penalty notice, whereas the AO has mentioned the acknowledgment receipt of speed post by which the notice was dispatched, y Hence no relief is being allowed at ground of appeal no.2. 3. Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for complying with the notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. He submitted that f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the body of the assessment order has mentioned that the assessee has complied with the statutory notices issued u/s 142(1) and the information/details asked for have been furnished which were discussed and placed on record. He has further mentioned that the assessment proceedings were attended by Shri Sanjay Jain, Chartered Accountant with whom the case was discussed. Since the assessee has furnished requisite details for completion of assessment by compliance of statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer and the assessment has been completed u/s 143(3), therefore, under the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(l)(b) of the Act. I, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to cancel the penalty so levied. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed. 5.1 Further, in the case of Globus Infocom Ltd. (supra) also, the penalty laid u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act has been deleted, where assessment is completed under Section 143(3) of the Act. The relevant finding of the order of the Tribunal (supra) is reproduced as under: 5. We ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
