Kusum Daga v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Cir.1(4), Nagpur
[Citation -2016-LL-1005-47]

Citation 2016-LL-1005-47
Appellant Name Kusum Daga
Respondent Name Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Cir.1(4), Nagpur
Court ITAT-Nagpur
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 05/10/2016
Assessment Year 2004-05
Judgment View Judgment
Bot Summary: Date of Hearing : 05-10-2016 Date of Pronouncement : 5th Oct., 2016 O R D E R. These are appeals by the assessees belonging to the same group against the respective orders of learned CIT(Appeals) confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) amounting to Rs.10,000/- for each of the year. Reasonable cause for the delay submitted 2 by the assessee, that the main person of the assessee looking after the Income- tax matter i.e. Shri Kautilya Daga was suffering from ailments was not accepted by the AO and the learned CIT(Appeals). The AO levied the penalty of Rs.10,000/- for one default. Upon careful consideration we find that penalty of.10,000/- in each year has been levied under section 271(1)(b) of the I.T. Act for the failure of the assessee to comply with the notice of the Assessing Officer. In our considered opinion the above explanation will suffice as a reasonable cause for the failure of the assessee so as to not invite rigour of penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the I.T. Act. Accordingly we set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the levy of penalty. Since the Division Bench of the ITAT has deleted the penalty in similar circumstances, I do not find any reason to depart from the same.


1 IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. (S.M.C.) S.No. ITA No. Asstt.Year Appellant Respondent. 1 to 7. 440 to 2004-05 to Smt. Kusum Asstt. Commissioner 446/Nag/2016 2010-11. Daga, Nagpur. of Income-tax, Central Cir.1(4), Nagpur. 8 to 13 447 to 2004-05 to M/s Shubh Asstt. Commissioner 452/Nag/2016. 2009-10. Labh of Income-tax, Industrialisers Central Cir.1(4), & Nagpur. Environments Purification Specialist Pvt. Ltd. 14 to 453 to 2004-05 tp Shri Kautilya Asstt. Commissioner 20 459/Nag/2016. 2010-11. Daga, Nagpur. of Income-tax, Central Cir.1(4), Nagpur. Appellant by : Shri Mukesh Agrawal. Respondent by : Smt. Agnes P. Thomas. Date of Hearing : 05-10-2016 Date of Pronouncement : 5th Oct., 2016 O R D E R. These are appeals by assessees belonging to same group against respective orders of learned CIT(Appeals) confirming levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) amounting to Rs.10,000/- for each of year. 2. In all these cases AO noted that there were 11/12 non compliances/defaults by assessee. Reasonable cause for delay submitted 2 by assessee, that main person of assessee looking after Income- tax matter i.e. Shri Kautilya Daga was suffering from ailments was not accepted by AO and learned CIT(Appeals). AO levied penalty of Rs.10,000/- for one default. AO did not specify as to with reference to which particular default he is not satisfied with reasonable cause attributed. assessee also submitted before learned CIT(Appeals) that this ITAT in case of same group of assessee in same circumstances vide order dated 21st August, 2015 in case of M/s Central India Minerals has deleted similar penalties on similar facts. However, learned CIT(Appeals) in his wisdom held that said decision was on different set of facts. 3. Against above order assessees are in appeal before ITAT. 4. I have heard both counsel and perused records. I find that Division Bench of this Tribunal in case of M/s Central India Minerals (supra) on same set of facts has deleted penalty holding as under : 5. We have heard learned D.R. Assessee s counsel has submitted adjournment petition. However, we find that issue involved is small one and can be adjudicated by hearing learned D.R. and perusing records. Accordingly adjournment petition has been rejected. 6. Upon careful consideration we find that penalty of `.10,000/- in each year has been levied under section 271(1)(b) of I.T. Act for failure of assessee to comply with notice of Assessing Officer. We find that section 273B provides that penalty in such cases need not be levied if it is proved that there was reasonable cause of said failure. We find that assessee has submitted that main partner of firm was not keeping well in this period. For this purpose medical certificates have also been produced before learned CIT(Appeals). Learned CIT(Appeals) has not doubted claim of illness of said main partner. In our considered opinion above explanation will suffice as reasonable cause for failure of assessee so as to not invite rigour of penalty under section 271(1)(b) of I.T. Act. Accordingly we set aside orders of authorities below and delete levy of penalty. 3 5. I find that facts in above said case of ITAT are similar to facts in present appeals. Since Division Bench of ITAT has deleted penalty in similar circumstances, I do not find any reason to depart from same. Further more I also note that as against 11/12 defaults noted by authorities below, penalty for only one default has been levied without specifying as to default with reference to which penalty was being levied. Hence I find that on facts and circumstances of this case respectfully following precedent as above, penalty for one default in this case deserves to be deleted. Accordingly I set aside orders of authorities below and delete levy of penalty. 6. In result, these appeals by assessee stand allowed. Order pronounced in Open Court on this 5th day of Oct., 2016. Sd/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. Nagpur, Dated: 5th Oct. , 2016. Copy forwarded to : 1. ________________________ 5, Temple Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur. 2. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-1(4), Nagpur. 3. C.I.T.- (Central), Nagpur. 4. CIT(Appeals), -3, Nagpur. 5. D.R., ITAT, Nagpur. 6. Guard File True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. Wakode. Kusum Daga v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Cir.1(4), Nagpur
Report Error