TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 390X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice was sent by notice server or through post or through e-mail and ensure whether same was served upon the assessee. No such fact has been brought on record by the AO - Further, we find that assessee has raised the change of address as one of the reasonable cause for non-compliance of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. We find that in the instant case before us also ex-parte assessment has been completed against the assessee due to noncompliance of the notices and in which the assessee has substantiated change of the address as the main reason. Therefore, respectfully following the finding of case of Balram Kumar Mahendra [ 2012 (6) TMI 10 - ITAT DELHI] - we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reassessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and against which the assessee is in appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority. The assessee contended that she is a salaried person and tax was deducted by the employer on the salary and therefore no return of income was filed by her in the regular course of income and due to change in her residential address, the notices issued could not be served upon her. The assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 was completed on address i.e. 29, 1st Floor, Sonawala Bldg., Bank Street, Fort, Mumbai400023. However, penalty u/s 271(1)(b) i.e. impugned order has been served upon address 204, 3H Kalpataru Aura, Opp. R City Mall, L.B.S. Road, Ghatkopar West, Mumbai-400086. The Ld. CIT(A), however, as confirmed l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be imposed, if it is proved that there was a reasonable cause for the said failure of the assessee to comply with the provisions of section 271(1)(b). In this case we find that non-appearance of the assesses before the Assessing Officer was caused by non-receipt of the notice. This in our considered opinion can be construed as reasonable cause under section 273B for non-compliance by the assessees. 10. Under such circumstances, rigours of penalty under section 271(1)(b) are not attracted in the case of the assessee. In this regard, we place reliance from the apex court decision rendered by a larger Bench comprising of three of their Lordships in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1972] 83 IT 26 (SC) wherein it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
