TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 638
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....manshu Shah, AR ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT Assessee is in appeal against order of ld.CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad dated 14.8.2018 for the Asstt.Year 2013-14. 2. Only grievance involved in this appeal is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 10,000/-. 3. As the facts emerges from the record, in response to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under section 271(1)(b) of the Act. 4. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that noncompliance of notice dated 2.2.2016 issued during the course of assessment proceedings was in fact got misplaced by the clerk of the assessee. However, assessee's representatives attended the hearing before the AO and submitted required details, and complied with various notices issued during the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly, he submitted that there is no sufficient reason for the Revenue authorities in imposition of impugned penalty which deserves to be deleted. On the other hand, the ld.CIT-DR supported the case of the Revenue and relied on their orders. 5. We have considered rival submissions and gone through the record carefully. The case of the Revenue is that since assessee has not complied with notice dated....