AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 1114
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctively. 2. In all these appeals, certain facts are common, the assessee has raised common grounds of appeal, therefore, with the consent of parties, all the appeals were clubbed, heard together and are decided by this consolidate order to avoid the conflicting decision. In ITA No. 417 to 421/Srt/2022 for the A.Y. 2012-13 to 2016-17, the assessee has challenged the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) and in ITA No. 422 & 423/Srt/2022 for the A.Y. 2017-18 to 2018-19, the assessee has challenged the penalty levied under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act. For appreciation of fact, the appeal in ITA No. 417/Srt/2022 for A.Y. 2012-13 is treated as 'lead' case, wherein, the assessee has raised fol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 04/12/2020 for A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(b) of the Act dated 08/01/2021 asking the assessee as to why penalty be not levied for non-compliance of notices under Section 142(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer recorded that no reply was filed by assessee. The Assessing officer levied penalty of Rs. 10,000/-, for non-compliance of notices dated 04/12/2020 under Section 142(1) of the Act. 5. Feeling aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, in levying penalty, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that all details were submitted from time to time to the Assessing Officer. For non-compliance for 04/12/2020, the assessee sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) of the Revenue and have also perused the orders of the lower authorities carefully. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessment order was passed by Assessing Officer on 19.05.2021 and no addition was made in the assessment order. The assessing officer accepted the explanation of assessee and accepted the return income. The Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance of notice dated 04.12.2020. The ld. AR submits that in the month of December, 2020, it was a severe period of Covid-19 infection throughout the country and the assessee could not file his explanation and sought adjournment. It is not the case of assessing officer that the assessee re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... were ignored by the Assessing Officer and therefore, there is no cause for levying of such penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act. The ld. AR of the assessee accordingly prayed for deleting the penalty of Rs. 5,000/-. To support his submission, the ld. AR has relied upon the following decisions: • Akash Manganlal Patel Vs DCIT ITA No. 141 to 147/Srt/2022 order dated 26/09/2022 • Jayantilal Arjunbhai Patel Vs DCIT ITA No. 134 to 140/Srt/2022 order dated 26/09/2022 • Sanjaybhai Arjunbhai Patel Vs DCIT ITA No. 148 to 154/Srt/2022. • Sanskruti Mega Structure Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT ITA No. 28/Srt/2018 order dated 19/05/2021, • Shri Puremswarup Jethabhai Patel Vs ACIT ITA No. 2658 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assed the assessment order on 19.05.2021. I noted that the Assessing officer levied the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- for non-compliance of notice vide his order dated 20/01/2021, that is prior to passing the assessment order. I further find that the ld. CIT(A) accepted the explanation of assessee and sustained the penalty to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. I find that there is no such discretionary power to ld CIT(A), to restrict the penalty to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. The order passed by ld CIT(A) is not in consonance with the provisions of section 271(1)(b), therefore, I direct to delete the penalty which is sustained to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. 12. Even otherwise I find convincing force in the submission of ld. AR of the assessee that durin....