AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for condonation of delay, which is supported by an affidavit of the assessee. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee has submitted that the assessee is a 58 years old lady suffering from various medical illnesses. The impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) was sent through e-mail, but due to health problem the assessee was undergoing the treatment, and, therefore, could not notice the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee has referred to the medical record of the assessee running into 216 pages and submitted that the assessee was suffering from various medical ailments and was confined to bed-rest and, therefore, the assessee could not file the appeal within a period of limitation. He has, thus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rinary tract infection, DMII and HIN 18.10.22 21.10.22 Suyog Hospital 6. Vitreo Retinal surgery for Retinal Detachment 05.12.22 06.12.22 Shankara Hospital We further note that the assessee has supported the reasons with medical record showing that the assessee was undergoing treatment of various ailments and was advised complete rest and in isolation for a period of about 6 months. Therefore, having considered the reasons explained by the assessee that she was suffering from various ailments and undergoing treatment, we are satisfied that the assessee was having sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation and accordingly the delay of 165 days in filing the present appeal, is condoned. 5. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tstanding demand u/s 156 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, then penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not valid/justified and the same be deleted. The Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the contention of the assessee and confirmed the penalty le vied by the AO while passing the impugned order. 7. Before the Tribunal, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee has submitted that the assessee diligently and voluntarily computed and paid self assessment tax of Rs. 2,16,470/- through challan dated 29.07.2011. However, due to the medical conditions and various ailments, the assessee is able to trace the return of income. Even in response to notice u/s 148, the assessee filed the return of income and declared the income of Rs. 12,00,400/-, which w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1)(c) is not justified and is liable to be deleted. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions:- (i) CIT vs. Pushpendra Surana, (2014) 264 CTR 204 (Raj). (ii) CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Mittal, 241 ITR 124 (MP) (iii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd., 144 taxmann.com 165. 8. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative had relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee did not file the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, but the return was filed after issue of notice u/s 148. Therefore, the income declared by the assessee is not voluntary, but in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 9. We have carefull....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tax on the total income assessed as reduced by the amount of advance tax, tax deducted at source, tax collected at source and selfassessment tax paid before the issue of notice u/s 148. The case of the assessee is covered by this clause (c) of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) and, hence, when the AO has determined the total tax on the income assessed at Rs. 2,08,142/- whereas the self-assessment tax paid by the assessee before the notice u/s 148 was issued is Rs.2,16,470/-, then balance would be nil and ,consequently, there would be nil amount of tax sought to be evaded for the purpose of levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, when the amount of tax to be evaded is nil in the case of the assessee, then qu....