https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769567 Penalty under section 271(1)(b) was treated as a quasi-criminal consequence, so it required more than mere delay or isolated non-compliance; deliberate defiance, contumacious conduct, or conscious disregard of the statutory duty had to be shown. Although there was non-compliance with the notice dated 21.08.2018, the record showed that the assessee subsequently complied with the statutory notices and the assessment was completed under section 143(3). As the default was not found to be deliberate or dishonest, the penalty was regarded as imposed only to deter delayed compliance and was deleted. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:35:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769567 Penalty under section 271(1)(b) was treated as a quasi-criminal consequence, so it required more than mere delay or isolated non-compliance; deliberate defiance, contumacious conduct, or conscious disregard of the statutory duty had to be shown. Although there was non-compliance with the notice dated 21.08.2018, the record showed that the assessee subsequently complied with the statutory notices and the assessment was completed under section 143(3). As the default was not found to be deliberate or dishonest, the penalty was regarded as imposed only to deter delayed compliance and was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769567