Case Law Details
Santosh Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur)
ITAT Raipur held that imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act within the time period contemplated in clause (a) of sub-section (1) to Section 275, i.e six months from the end of the month in which appellate order was received is duly justified.
Facts- The assessee who was engaged in manufacturing and trading of iron and steel items had carried out substantial business transactions during the year but had failed to file his income return, therefore the A.O. initiated proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act. Notice u/s. 148 was issued to the assessee.
As the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued to him, therefore, the A.O. was constrained to frame assessment vide order passed u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 15.03.2002, wherein his income was assessed at Rs.5,62,910/-. The A.O., while culminating the assessment, inter alia, initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(b) of the Act.
Considering the non-compliance of the assessee to the notices issued during assessment proceedings, the A.O. called upon him to explain why the penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act may not be imposed. As the explanation filed by the assessee did not find favor with the A.O., he vide order passed u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act dated 27.07.2015 imposed a penalty aggregating to Rs. 70,000/- i.e @ Rs.10,000/- for each of the seven defaults.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
