https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85795 ITAT set aside penalty under s.272A(1)(d) imposed on appellant, a small fruit vendor, for alleged non-compliance with notices under s.142(1)/143(2) during demonetization-related scrutiny. While CIT(A) upheld AO's addition in quantum proceedings, ITAT noted appellant's limited legal awareness and inability to afford proper representation. Tribunal distinguished between total non-compliance versus insufficient compliance, observing appellant had attempted to cooperate by submitting bank statements. Finding revenue cannot exploit assessee's vulnerable position, ITAT directed deletion of penalty, acknowledging disproportionate financial burden on small vendor and partial compliance efforts made. Appeal allowed in favor of assessee. en-us Mon, 17 Feb 2025 08:48:33 +0530 Mon, 17 Feb 2025 08:48:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85795 ITAT set aside penalty under s.272A(1)(d) imposed on appellant, a small fruit vendor, for alleged non-compliance with notices under s.142(1)/143(2) during demonetization-related scrutiny. While CIT(A) upheld AO's addition in quantum proceedings, ITAT noted appellant's limited legal awareness and inability to afford proper representation. Tribunal distinguished between total non-compliance versus insufficient compliance, observing appellant had attempted to cooperate by submitting bank statements. Finding revenue cannot exploit assessee's vulnerable position, ITAT directed deletion of penalty, acknowledging disproportionate financial burden on small vendor and partial compliance efforts made. Appeal allowed in favor of assessee. Highlights Income Tax Mon, 17 Feb 2025 08:48:33 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85795