https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467868 Non-compliance with repeated notices under section 142(1) justified levy of penalty, because the assessee failed to respond and the default contributed to an ex parte assessment under section 144. Reliance on a tax consultant was not accepted as reasonable cause under section 273B, since the primary duty to comply with statutory notices remained with the assessee. The penalty under section 271(1)(b) was therefore upheld in principle, but the facts did not indicate deliberate tax evasion and the quantum was found excessive; accordingly, it was reduced from Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 10,000. en-us Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2026 19:31:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467868 Non-compliance with repeated notices under section 142(1) justified levy of penalty, because the assessee failed to respond and the default contributed to an ex parte assessment under section 144. Reliance on a tax consultant was not accepted as reasonable cause under section 273B, since the primary duty to comply with statutory notices remained with the assessee. The penalty under section 271(1)(b) was therefore upheld in principle, but the facts did not indicate deliberate tax evasion and the quantum was found excessive; accordingly, it was reduced from Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 10,000. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467868