Assessee's appeal against penalty for non-compliance with notices dismissed by ITAT

The appeal filed by the Assessee against the penalty under section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices was dismissed by the ITAT. The ITAT upheld the penalty, emphasizing the importance of complying with statutory notices under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

---

---

Issues:
Penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-compliance with notices issued by the Assessing Officer.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the penalty levied under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessee, an individual, did not file the Income Tax Return for the said year. Notices under sections 148 and 142(1) were issued to the Assessee, but no compliance was made. An ex-parte assessment order was passed due to the non-cooperative attitude of the Assessee. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(b) considering the non-compliance with notices. The Assessee claimed before the CIT(A) that they were medically unfit to comply with the notices and requested the penalty to be deleted. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty, stating that the non-compliance with the notice dated 31.05.2016 was not denied by the Assessee.

The Assessee appealed before the ITAT, claiming medical unfitness during the period of non-compliance. The Revenue argued that the penalty was rightly levied for non-compliance with the notices. The ITAT considered the submissions and upheld the penalty. The ITAT noted that the medical certificate was not submitted before the Assessing Officer, and as the Assessee did not deny the non-compliance with the notice dated 31.05.2016, the penalty under section 271(1)(b) was confirmed. The ITAT rejected the Assessee's claim, stating that the findings of the CIT(A) did not warrant interference, and the penalty was justified.

Therefore, the appeal filed by the Assessee against the penalty under section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices was dismissed by the ITAT. The decision to confirm the penalty was based on the Assessee's failure to comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer, despite the Assessee's claim of medical unfitness during the relevant period. The ITAT upheld the penalty, emphasizing the importance of complying with statutory notices under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

---