Case Law Details
Nagarathinam Rajendran Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Since the assessee could not file his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271 F of the Act. There was no response from the assessee against the penalty notice. Since, the assessee failed to file his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹. 5,000/- under section 271 F of the Act, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A).
The case of the assessee is that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 30.09.2014 through his representative Mr. V. Ramakrishnan, CA and after few days he fell in sick, hospitalized and thereafter he expired on 17.11.2014. Copy of the death certificate was brought on record. The assessee was under bonafide belief that the CA would have filed E-verification. Only after service of notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee came to know that E-verification was not done while filing the return of income on 30.09.2014. Thereafter in response to the notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee once again filed the return. Since the delay in doing E-verification/filing belated return is neither wilful nor wanton and the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause, we are of the considered opinion that the penalty of ₹.5,000/- is not liable to be levied under section 271F of the Act. Accordingly, the penalty levied under section 271 F of the Act is deleted.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi dated 20.01.2023 relevant to the assessment year 2014-15 passed under section 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short].
2. Brief facts of the case are that in the case of the assessee, the assessment was completed under section 147/144 of the Act dated 21.09.2021. The assessee was liable to file his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. However, since the assessee has violated the provisions of sub section (1) of the section 139 of the Act by not filing the return of income within the time limit, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹.5,000/- under section 271 F of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty levied under section 271 F of the Act.
3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not doing the E-verification of the return filed on 30.09.2014, the delay is neither wilful nor wanton and prayed for deleting the penalty levied under section 271 F of the Act.
4. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of authorities
5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. Since the assessee could not file his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271 F of the Act. There was no response from the assessee against the penalty notice. Since, the assessee failed to file his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹. 5,000/- under section 271 F of the Act, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A).
6. The case of the assessee is that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 30.09.2014 through his representative Mr. V. Ramakrishnan, CA and after few days he fell in sick, hospitalized and thereafter he expired on 17.11.2014. Copy of the death certificate was brought on record. The assessee was under bonafide belief that the CA would have filed E-verification. Only after service of notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee came to know that E-verification was not done while filing the return of income on 30.09.2014. Thereafter in response to the notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee once again filed the return. Since the delay in doing E-verification/filing belated return is neither wilful nor wanton and the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause, we are of the considered opinion that the penalty of ₹.5,000/- is not liable to be levied under section 271F of the Act. Accordingly, the penalty levied under section 271 F of the Act is deleted.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced on 06thApril, 2023 at Chennai.
