Case Law Details
Gyan Mata Radha Satyam Kriyayog Ashram Research Institute Vs ITO (ITAT Allahabad)
On the one hand, the Assessing Officer has given the date of compliances in the above table whereas the penalty was imposed on the ground that the above notices were not complied by the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer has also stated that the assessee has not made compliance to the show cause notice issued u/s. 271(1)(b). However, that cannot be a ground for imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act. In the quantum appeal, the ld. CIT(A) vide its order dated 22.09.2020 has deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer and therefore, it amounts to acceptance of the explanation of the assessee filed during the assessment proceedings. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of Section 273B of the Act when the assessee has finally complied with the notice issued by the Assessing Officer the penalty is not imposable as the explanation filed by the assessee was finally found to be correct and accepted in the quantum appeal. Consequently the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act is deleted.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT ALLAHABAD
This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.08.2020 of ld. CIT(A), Allahabad arising from penalty order passed u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short the “Act”) for the AY 201112. The assessee has raised the following grounds:
“1. That in any view of the matter penalty imposed u/s 271(l)(b) of the IT Act by order dated 29/03/19 imposing a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- the is bad both on the facts and in law.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
THE ASSESSMENT WRONGLY COMPLETED U/S 144 INSTEAD OF 143(3) WHEATHER THE PENALTY U/S 271(1) (B) CAN BE IMPOSED OR NOT