2014 (1) TMI 1688

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-II), New Delhi dated 25.6.2013 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10, wherein penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 271(1)(b) has been sustained. 2. In this case AO noted that assessee did not comply with the statutory notice issued under section 142(1) dated 8.11.2010. This was considered by the AO as willful default o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....239/Del/2013 in the case of Shivaansh Advertising and Publications (P) Ltd. vide its order dated 3.1.2014 has delete d the similar penalty holding as under:- "We have heard both the sides and perused the material placed before us. The penalty had been levied by the Assessing Officer for non-compliance of the notice dated 8.11.2010. From the assessment order, it is evident that the notice under se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. Accordingly, the same is cancelled." 6. Accordingly, Ld. Counsel of the assessee pleaded that the penalty may be deleted. 7. Ld. DR on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 8. We have carefully considered the submissions. We find that assessee has been given only 8-9 days to make compliance. The reason for non-compliance has been given to be occupation of the conc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances. Even if a minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a ....