2026 (1) TMI 754

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by Assessing Officer u/s. 272A of the Act on 27.03.2022. 2. Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee, are as follows: 1. Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] erred on facts as also in law in confirming penalty of Rs. 50,000/- levied u/s. 272A(1)(d) of the Act. The penalty levied u/s. 272A(1)(d) of the Act is totally unjustified on facts as also in law may kindly be deleted. 2. Your Honour's appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal. 3. Brief facts qua the issue are that in the instant case the assessee did not file return of income for the peri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....come at Rs. 2,89,190/-. Further, the assessment proceedings in the instant case has been completed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 27/03/2022 by making addition of Rs. 6,11,000/- to the total income of the assessee treating it as unaccounted investment for the A.Y. 2017-18. Also, penalty proceedings u/s 271A(1)(d) of the I. T. Act are initiated vide Assessing Officer show cause dated-27/03/2022 for non compliance to statutory notices issued u/s 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. Further, during the course of E-proceedings, several notices u/s 142(1) of Act was issued and served upon the assessee from time to time through Registered Email id/RPAD of the assessee, but only part compliance was made by the assessee. The assessee wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....022, 17/02/2022 & 15/03/2022. Accordingly, AO imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000 /-u/s. 272A(1)(d) of the I.T. Act 1961. 5. Aggrieved by the order of assessing officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who has confirmed the addition made by the assessing officer. The Ld.CIT(A) noticed that although the notices were served on the e-mail id of the husband of the assessee, despite of this the assessee (wife) did not appear before AO, and did not make the compliance of various notices, hence, AO has rightly imposed the penalty. This way, the Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty imposed by the assessing officer. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal. 7. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Tax Department. However, Income Tax Department (AO) issued notices on the e-mail id of her husband, hence assessee was not aware about the notices issued by the AO. I also note that husband of the assessee could not open his e-mail id, as the husband was feeling severe illness and the assessing officer did not send the notices on the e-mail id of the assessee (herself), which was registered with Income Tax Department. I note that when assessee herself had furnished his e-mail id to the Income Tax Department, then AO should have served the notices on the e-mail id of the assessee and not on the e-mail id of her husband. The Law is well settled that when the statue required to do certain thing in certain way, the thing must be done in that wa....