TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 160
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o issued but those notices could not be complied by the assessee. Therefore, the A.O. considered that the assessee has not cooperated with the department in finalizing the scrutiny assessment proceedings, therefore levied penalty U/s 271(1)(b) of the Act at Rs. 40,000/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of penalty imposed U/s 271(1)(b) of the Act, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limini on the ground that there was delay of 624 days in filing the appeal and the assessee could not justify the condonation of delay with sufficient cause or reasons, therefore, appeal of the assessee was dismissed at the stage of admission vide impugned order. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the ITAT on the grounds mentioned below. "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal is contrary to provision of law, contrary to all cannons of natural justice and is also contrary to facts, material and evidence existing on records. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal has rejected the appeal at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der: "That On behalf of the assessee I requested your good self for condonation of delay in filing appeal against demand created vide order dated:- 20-11-2018 which was served to assessee on 25th, Nov., 2018. That though appeal was due for filing on 19-01-2019, but since there was a casualty happened in the family of assessee, therefore she was fully completely disturbed hence appeal for year could not submitted within stipulated time therefore on behalf of the assessee I requested your good self for condonation of delay in filing appeal. In the light of the above mentioned facts submit that the delay is due to the circumstances beyond our control. Accordingly requesting your honor to condone the delay and entertain the appeal. Sir we will be grateful to your honor for allowing the condonation of delay in filing the appeal." 7. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. As regards the sufficiency of cause for filing the appeals belatedly, it is settled principles of law that the Courts have to take liberal approach while interpreting the expression 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay. In case of Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-15 the assessee was transferred to Court Campus Kekri as an Additional Civil Niyayadhish (Kanisth). During the AY 2015-16 the assessee was transferred as Judicial Magistrate Jaipur. During the AY 2016-17 the assessee was transferred as Judicial Magistrate Jodhpur and at present at Barmer. Hence, from all these facts it is clear that the assessee is continuously migrating from one district to another for the purpose of serving her duties to the Government of Rajasthan (Law Department). Due to the transferable job, which is uncontrollable in the hands of the assessee hence she was unable to comply with a notice under section 142(1). After knowing the fact and circumstances, the assessee had responded the notices. The authorized representative had attended the department and appellate proceedings and all demand was made NIL at quantum assessment. Certified copy of order was obtained and thereafter appeal is preferred with delay of 625 days before your honour with this petition far condonation of delay in filing of appeal. Our point wise submission is as under for condonation of delay:- 1. We hereby states that as per the provisions of the section 246(2)(b) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....your goodself is requested to please condone the delay, as your acceptance can render natural justice to the assessee. There remains no ground for the denial of the acceptance of appeal of the assessee as quantum appeal is already decided in favour of assessee by CIT Appeals, Jodhpur." 10. On the other hand, the ld DR has relied on the orders of the revenue authorities. 11. We have considered the rival contentions and carefully perused the material available on record. From the facts of the present case, we noticed that it is an undisputed fact that the assessee is an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in Rajasthan Judicial Services. The assessee filed her return of income on 27/07/2011 declaring total income of Rs. 12,80,870/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice U/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served at her Pali and Kekri district, Ajmer residence. However, in the meantime, the assessee was transferred to various places of Rajasthan. A chart showing the fact of notices issued but at that time, the assessee was posted at another place, is as under: Particular Date of Notice Assessee Posted at Notice U/s 142(1) issued a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... failure of the assessee to comply with the provisions of section 271(I)(b). In this case it was found that non-appearance of assessee before the AO the in opinion of Tribunal was caused by non-receipt of the notice and was a reasonable cause, therefore, penalty was deleted." 12. In our view, Section 273B of the Act clearly provides, inter alia, that penalty U/s 271(1)(b) of the Act need not be imposed, if it is proved that there was a 'reasonable cause' for the said failure of the assessee to comply with the provisions of Section 271(1)(b) of the Act. From the facts of the present case, we found that non-appearance of the assessee before the A.O. or non-compliance of the notices issued was only because of 'non-receipt of the notices' by the assessee and therefore, in our considered view, the same was a "reasonable cause" as has also been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Woodward Governor Nidia P Ltd. Vs CIT (2002) 253 ITR 745 (Delhi) wherein it was held that levy of penalty is not automatic and the absence of a 'reasonable cause' is necessary. 13. Further, the Coordinate Bench of Indore ITAT, in the case of M.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs ACI....