TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 1449
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ain 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. 424 to 428/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. 429 & 430/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. 424/Srt/2022 for A.Y. 2012-13 is treated as 'lead' case, wherein, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. On....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer 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 notice dated 03/12/2020 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 03/12/2020, the assessee stated that there was delay due to Covid-19 pandemic du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e before the Assessing Officer. The assessee subsequently made full compliance, the explanation offered by assessee on various issues was not accepted and ultimately made various additions/disallowances by the Assessing Officer in final assessment order. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee explained that there was reasonable cause for non-filing/response and seeking time for making compliance to the notices issued by assessing officer. Though, the ld. CIT(A), not accepted that complete details filed by assessee, yet the penalty order for alleged default, was sustained to the extent of Rs. 10,000/-, however, in other similar cases the penalty was restricted to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. 8. The ld. AR submits that the Coordinate Benches of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue supported the orders of lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR submits that acceptance of return of income has no effect on noncompliance of notice during the assessment. The penalty under Section 271(1)(b) or 272A(1)(d) is levied for noncompliance of notice issued by Assessing Officer or by ld. CIT(A). The alleged subsequent compliance was made by assessee when penalty was levied by Assessing Officer. Before levying penalty, the assessee was given full opportunity before levying penalty under Section 271(1)(b) or under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act as the case may be. From the order of lower authorities, it is clearly discernible that assessee is in habit for non-compliance. This is a fit case for levy of penalty, as has been levied by Asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Section 142(1) but assessment order was passed under Section 143(3) and not under Section 144, that meant that subsequent compliance in the assessment proceedings was considered as a good compliance and defaults committed earlier were ignored by Assessing Officer and, therefore, penalty under Section 271(1)(b) was not justified. I further find that similar view was followed in a series of decisions as has been relied by the ld. AR for the assessee in his submission. Thus, considering the fact that assessment in the present case was completed under Section 153A/143(3) in accepting return of income, I find that it was sufficient compliance, merely because the assessee could not make compliance due to some bonafide reason, no penalty under S....