Case Law Details
Sumit Maheshwari Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
In the case of Sumit Maheshwari vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Delhi), the appeal arose from a penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-compliance with a notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act. The core issue was whether the penalty was justified given the circumstances surrounding the service of notices by the Income Tax Department.
Background and Arguments:
The assessee, Sumit Maheshwari, challenged the penalty levied on the grounds that notices, including the notice under section 142(1) and subsequent proceedings, were sent to his old address at 31, Chanakyapuri, Meerut. However, the assessee had long since shifted to a new address at 94-95, Chanakyapuri, Meerut, and had duly informed the Income Tax Department by filing his income tax returns for both the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 with the updated address.
Despite the change in address being on record through these filings, the notices were consistently sent to the old address. Consequently, the assessee contended that since the notices were not received due to the incorrect address being used by the department, the penalty under section 271(1)(b) was not justified.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
