9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty u/s 271B of the Act. 2. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; 2.1 The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of running petrol pump. The assessee filed her return of income ['ITR' hereinafter] on 26/09/2018 which was summarily processed u/s 143(1) of the Act accepting the returned income however triggered a penalty proceedings u/s 271B for non-furnishing of Tax Audit Report ['TAR' hereinafter] within the prescribed time limit u/s 44AB r.w.s. 139(1) of the Act. 2.2 A penalty proceeding by issue of notice dt. 12/03/2020 u/s 274(1) r.w.s. 271B was initiated for non-furnishing TAR by the due of filing ITR for AY 2017-18 i.e. 07/11/2017. In response thereto the assessee neither made any submission nor any representation exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case was called twice; none appeared at the bequest of the assessee. In absence of appellant, with able assistance from Revenue we deem it fit to reject adjournment dt. 15/03/2024 which besides informing the appellant is no more cited no convincing reasons therein. Consequently we proceeded to adjudicate the matter ex-parte u/s 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Rules, 1963. ['ITAT-Rules']. 4. We have heard Ld. DR Mr Marathe and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules, perused the material placed on records. We note that, after having failed to prove her case on merits, the appellant without touching provisions of section 273B of the Act challenged the levy on legal ground. We are mindful note that, after having instituted instant appeal u/s 253(1)( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, the legal representatives of the deceased can also be liable to pay penalty on behalf of the deceased assessee pursuant to the provisions of Section 159(1) of the Act. This finds support in the ratio of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in case of 'Kalawati Devi Vs ITO' [1981, 6 Taxman 252] wherein their Hon'ble Lordship have held that, section 159(1) clearly makes the legal representatives liable not only for the tax payable by the deceased-assessee but also for all sums which the deceased would have been liable to pay had he not died. Hence, penalty proceedings for a default committed by a deceased could be started or continued against the legal representatives, too. Similarly, the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in 'Smt. Tapati Pal Vs CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e penalties are levied for the contumacious conduct of the wrong doer therefore such penalty proceedings abate on the death of the assessee. If recovery of , penalty is permitted against the estate of deceased, then it would clearly lead to permitting the enforcement of crime against the right of LR in succeeded estate. 9. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in 'Taraknath Gayen and others Vs CEGAT' [1987, 31 ELT 631 (Cal)] & 'Omwati Vs UOI' [2000, 125 ELT 136 (All.)] their Hon'ble Lordships have held that, the penalty amount is not recoverable from the legal representatives of accused; as imposition of penalty is intended to penalise the accused, therefore, recovery of penalty from the legal representatives would amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
