ITAT JODHPUR: No penalties upheld for non-compliance; valid reasons for adjournment considered.

The Appellate Tribunal ITAT JODHPUR heard three appeals related to penalty imposition under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 for non-compliance of a notice served on a specific date. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessees, noting that as the Assessing Officer did not pass a best judgment assessment under section 144 on the date of alleged non-compliance, and considering the valid reasons for seeking adjournment, no penalty was warranted. Citing a similar case, the penalties in all three appeals were deleted, resulting in the acceptance of the assessees' appeals.

---

---

Issues involved: Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 for non-compliance of notice under section 142(1) on a specific date.

Summary:
The Appellate Tribunal ITAT JODHPUR heard three appeals related to the same group of assessees with identical issues. The representatives for both the assessee and the Department were present during the hearing. The penalty was imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 for non-compliance of a notice served on a particular date. The assessees had moved an application for adjournment on the date in question, which was not denied by the AO. The AO did not pass any order under section 144 of the Act on that date, leading the assessees to argue that the adjournment was granted. The Tribunal decision in a similar case was cited, where the penalty was deleted under section 271(1)(b) of the Act. The Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

After considering the arguments, the Tribunal found in favor of the assessees. It was noted that when the AO did not pass a best judgment assessment under section 144 on the date of alleged non-compliance, especially when adjournment was sought with valid reasons, it did not constitute non-compliance warranting a penalty. The Tribunal, even without solely relying on previous decisions, concluded that no penalties should be levied in these cases. Citing the Tribunal order that was referred to by the Authorized Representative, the penalties in all three appeals of the assessees were deleted. Consequently, all three appeals of the assessees were accepted.

---