9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 29/07/2021 of ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. The impugned penalty order u/s. 271(1)(b) dated 27/06/2019 as well as the notice u/s. 271(1)(b) is bad in law, illegal and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction, barred by limitation and various other reasons and hence the same may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income is placed at page No. 1 of the paper book and thus the ld. AR has submitted that the assessee filed return of income which was not considered by the A.O. while issuing the notice U/s 148 of the Act which is issued on the presumption that the assessee has not filed any return of income. The ld. AR has further submitted that since the assessee has shifted from Jaipur to Guwahati and filed his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has not filed his return of income with the jurisdictional ITO but unilaterally chose to file the return with the ITO, Ward 3(3), Guwahati who has no jurisdiction to assess the income of the assessee. Thus, wrong filing of return of income cannot be a ground for non-compliance of notices issued by the A.O. She has relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that it is clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee but since the assessee has shifted from Jaipur to Guwahati and also filed the return of income, therefore, it amounts to a bonafide and reasonable explanation for non-compliance of the notices issued by the A.O. U/s 142(1) of the Act for which the A.O. has levied the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- U/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. By considering the facts and circumstances of the case when the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
