Assessee's appeal dismissed for delay in filing penalty appeals; some allowed for statistical purposes.

The appeal of the assessee in ITA.No.844/Hyd/2015 was dismissed by the ITAT due to insufficient explanations for the delay in filing appeals against penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and section 271D of the I.T. Act, 1961. However, ITA.Nos.845 & 846/Hyd/2015 were treated as allowed for statistical purposes as the assessee did not actively challenge the re-assessment and penalty proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Delay in filing appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) against various orders, refusal to condone the delay, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and section 271D of the I.T. Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-VII, Hyderabad for the A.Y. 2011-2012. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals against the orders of the A.O. under section 143(3) read with section 147, penalty order under section 271(1)(c), and order under section 271D by refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeals.

2. The assessee, a trader in IMFL, filed the return of income for A.Y. 2011-2012, which was initially processed resulting in a refund. Subsequently, after receiving information regarding investments, a notice under section 148 was issued. During re-assessment proceedings, discrepancies in net profit percentage were noted, and the assessee explained challenges in maintaining proper sale bills due to the nature of the retail business. The A.O. proposed estimating gross profit based on fixed MRP, which the assessee accepted. Further, discrepancies in explaining the sources of investment led to additions in the income.

3. The A.O. initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and section 271D. The assessee, after delays, filed appeals against these orders with an application for condonation of delay citing misplacement of assessment records. The Ld. CIT(A) refused to condone the delay, leading to the appeals being dismissed.

4. The ITAT noted that the assessee agreed to additions made by the A.O. during assessment but did not appear during penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c). However, detailed submissions were made during proceedings under section 271D. The delay in filing appeals was attributed to the misplacement of files. The ITAT referred to a Supreme Court judgment on condonation of delay and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to refuse condonation of delay.

5. The ITAT concluded that the assessee's explanations for the delay were not sufficient, especially considering the nature of the penalty under section 271D. As the assessee did not actively challenge the re-assessment and penalty proceedings, the delay in filing appeals was not condoned. One appeal was dismissed, while others were treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Judgment: The appeal of the assessee in ITA.No.844/Hyd/2015 is dismissed, while ITA.Nos.845 & 846/Hyd/2015 are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

---