2022 (12) TMI 389

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in passing order confirming penalty U/s. 271(1)(b) of Rs. 20,000/-. The same needs cancellation. 2. The Ld. CIT(A] has erred in law and facts in passing order confirming penalty U/s. 271(1)(b) of Rs. 20,000/- although no legal service of the notices for which penalty is levied is there. The penalty needs cancellation. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in not considering the aspect that the order confirming penalty has been passed without considering statutory position. The penalty order passed is bad in law. The penalty needs cancellation. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 12. Taking into consideration over all legal, statutory and settled law beside factual aspects of the case no penalty ought to have been levied. The penalty needs cancellation. 13. The appellant craves leave to reserve his right to amend/alter/add and/or substitute any/all grounds of appeal before the actual hearing takes place. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs. 20,000/- levied u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act. 4. Briefly, the facts are that the assessee is an individual. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Act issued notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 01-11-2017 and 04-12-2017 but the assessee failed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts and circumstances the Delhi Tribunal in case of Smt. Rekha Rani vs. DCIT reported in 60 taxmann.com 131 has decided the issue in favour of assessee in part by observing that penalty for the first default of non-compliance of notice under section 143(2)/142(1) of the Act was sufficient enough. The relevant extract of the order reads as under: 5. We have considered the submissions of learned DR and have perused the order of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). we find that there was no reasonable cause on the part of the assessee for not appearing on the different dates of hearing before the Assessing Officer in response to notice issued under Section 143(2) of the Act. However, we find that the default is same and, there....