Facts of the Case
The
assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading in plywood,
adhesive, locks, kitchen appliances, hardware and cement.
A
survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act was conducted on 08.02.2018.
The case was selected for compulsory scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2)
was issued on 20.09.2019.
The
assessment was completed under Section 144 on 23.04.2021 determining income at
Rs.19,86,138/- as against returned income of Rs.1,64,420/-.
Penalty
proceedings were initiated for non-compliance of notices issued under Section
142(1). Notices dated 18.01.2021 and 01.02.2021 were issued, but no compliance
was made. Subsequently, notice under Section 274 read with Section 272A(1)(d)
was issued.
The
assessee submitted that adjournment applications had been filed in response to
the notices under Section 142(1). However, as per the penalty order passed
under Section 272A(1)(d), the alleged adjournment applications were not
available on record.
Thereafter,
further notices under Section 274 read with Section 272A(1)(d) were issued
through e-mail and Speed Post, but no compliance was made.
Accordingly,
penalty of Rs.20,000/- was levied under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance
of the two notices under Section 142(1).
The
assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A), which was dismissed vide
order dated 18.09.2024 confirming the penalty.
Issues Involved
- Whether penalty
of Rs.20,000/- under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance of notices
under Section 142(1) was justified.
- Whether the
CIT(A) passed a speaking order in compliance with Section 250(6).
- Whether the
assessee was provided adequate opportunity during penalty proceedings.
Petitioner’s Arguments
During
hearing before the Tribunal, none appeared on behalf of the assessee.
However,
it was the case of the assessee before the lower authorities that:
- Adjournment
applications were filed in response to notices under Section 142(1).
- Non-compliance
was not deliberate.
- The period
coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Respondent’s Arguments
The
learned Senior Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower
authorities.
The
CIT(A), while confirming the penalty, observed that:
- Compliance dates
(29.01.2021 and 08.02.2021) fell in January and February 2021.
- The second wave
of COVID-19 started later (March–May 2021).
- No evidence was
furnished to substantiate the claim of adjournment applications.
- Therefore,
penalty of Rs.20,000/- deserved confirmation.
Court Order / Findings
The
Tribunal observed that:
- The assessment
was completed ex-parte.
- The CIT(A)
confirmed the penalty.
- However, the
CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order on the grounds raised by the
assessee.
The
Tribunal held that under Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) is duty-bound to
pass a reasoned and speaking order addressing the grounds of appeal on merits.
Although
the CIT(A) had afforded opportunities to the assessee, the Tribunal was of the
view that one more opportunity should be granted.
Accordingly:
- The impugned
order of the CIT(A) was set aside.
- The issue
relating to levy of penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) was restored to the
file of the CIT(A).
- The CIT(A) was
directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after providing
reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
The
appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Important Clarification
The
Tribunal did not adjudicate on the merits of the penalty under Section
272A(1)(d). The matter was remanded solely for fresh adjudication by the
CIT(A).
The
order reiterates:
- The mandatory
requirement of passing speaking orders under Section 250(6).
- The necessity of
affording reasonable opportunity in penalty proceedings.
- That appellate
authorities must deal with grounds of appeal in detail rather than
confirming penalty in a summary manner.
Link to
download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770884783_NAVNIRMANALLAHABADVS.DEPUTYCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCENTRALCIRCLEALLAHABAD2.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment