TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1206
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment Year (A.Y) 2015-16. 2. The effective ground raised by the assessee in the present appeal is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty levied, despite the assessment having been completed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act, and that the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) is invalid, particularly when the tax effect is below Rs. 50 lakhs. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, did not file the return of income originally. Based on information available with the Department that the assessee had purchased a property for a consideration of Rs. 30 lakhs whereas the value of the transaction was Rs. 70 lakhs, proceedings under section 148A were initiated. Consequently, notice under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- has been imposed on the assessee u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- for non-compliances on 07 occasions. However, the assessment order was not passed u/s 144 of the Act and is a speaking order. In the assessment proceedings, assessee has submitted all necessary documents and evidences to prove his case, therefore the question of imposition of penalty will not arise. In fact, the only addition in this case was Rs. 9,41,900/- as evident in para 3.4 of the assessment order towards the difference between purchase consideration and sale value of property. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has supplied all information and evidences though albeit late the AO has passed the order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of Income Tax Act] was considered as good compliance by the Assessing Officer and that the defaults earlier committed should be treated as having been ignored by the Assessing Officer. For this contention he relied on orders of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi in the cases of Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs. ACIT 5 DTR 429 (Delhi Tribunal), Globus Infocom Limited vs. DCIT (order dated 29.06.2016 in ITA No. 738/Del./2014 for AY 2010-11), Carreen Builders & Developers vs. DCIT (order dated 20.09.2017 in ITA No. 5737/Del/2015 for for AY 2012-13). In these orders, it was held by Co-ordinate Benches of ITAT, Delhi that when the order is finally passed u/s 143(3) of IT Act and not u/s 144 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (D) We find on perusal of the assessment order that in paragraph 2 of the assessment order, that the Assessing Officer has expressed satisfaction with the compliances made by the assessee. To quote from the assessment order, the observation of the Assessing Officer is: "In compliance to the notices, Sh. Gaurav Jindal, CA & authorized representative of the assessee attended for and on behalf of the assessee from time to time and furnished written submissions and details called for. These were examined and the case was discussed with the authorized representative." It can be readily inferred from this observation of the Assessing Officer that the Assessing Officer was, on the whole, satisfied with the overall compliances made by the assess....