Manoj Kumar Through Legal Heir Alka v. The Income-tax Officer, Ward-44(5), New Delhi
[Citation -2019-LL-0917-3]

Citation 2019-LL-0917-3
Appellant Name Manoj Kumar Through Legal Heir Alka
Respondent Name The Income-tax Officer, Ward-44(5), New Delhi
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 17/09/2019
Assessment Year 2012-13
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags levy of penalty • disallowance of expenses
Bot Summary: Briefly the facts of the case are that the A.O. passed the assessment order under section 143(3) vide Order Dated 23.03.2015 computing the total income at Rs.37,98,150/- as against the returned income of Rs.9,42,160/- by disallowing certain expenses. The A.O. vide separate Order Dated 28.09.2015 levied the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act for a sum of Rs.3,18,378/-. The A.O, thereafter, passed the Order under section 154 of the I.T. Act, Dated 31.12.2015 computing the penalty to Rs.82,750/-. The assessee challenged this Order under section 154 of the I.T. Act, Dated 31.12.2015 before the Ld. CIT(A). We have heard the Ld. D.R. who has supported the Orders of the authorities below by submitting that assessee has merely challenged the Order under section 154 before the Ld. CIT(A) in which no infirmity have been pointed out. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the Order dated 31.12.2015 passed by ITO, Ward- 44(5), New Delhi, under section 154 of the I.T. Act. No infirmity have been pointed out in the Order of the A.O. before the Ld. CIT(A).


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES E : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Late Manoj Kumar, Income Tax Officer, Through Legal Heir Smt. Alka, RZ-C-1/76, Gali vs., Ward-44(5), E-2 Block, Civic Centre, No.38, Mahavir Enclave-II, New Delhi. Palam, New Delhi 110059. PIN - 110 002. PAN AKYPK0833F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 16.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 17.09.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by assessee has been directed against order of Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi, Dated 25.11.2016, for A.Y. 2012-2013, challenging levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c)/154 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar, Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi. 2. Briefly facts of case are that A.O. passed assessment order under section 143(3) vide Order Dated 23.03.2015 computing total income at Rs.37,98,150/- as against returned income of Rs.9,42,160/- by disallowing certain expenses. A.O. vide separate Order Dated 28.09.2015 levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act for sum of Rs.3,18,378/-. A.O, thereafter, passed Order under section 154 of I.T. Act, Dated 31.12.2015 computing penalty to Rs.82,750/-. assessee challenged this Order under section 154 of I.T. Act, Dated 31.12.2015 before Ld. CIT(A). It was pleaded that no penalty can be imposed against L.R. as no estate has developed on assessee from deceased assessee. Ld. CIT(A) rejected contention of assessee and dismissed appeal of assessee. 3. assessee has been notified date of hearing twice through registered post. However, none appeared on behalf of assessee. 3 ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar, Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi. 4. We have heard Ld. D.R. who has supported Orders of authorities below by submitting that assessee has merely challenged Order under section 154 before Ld. CIT(A) in which no infirmity have been pointed out. Therefore, appeal of assessee rightly dismissed. 5. After considering submissions of Ld. D.R, we are of view that no interference is called for in matter. assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against Order dated 31.12.2015 passed by ITO, Ward- 44(5), New Delhi, under section 154 of I.T. Act. A.O. in this impugned order under section 154 has merely calculated penalty amount finding mistake therein and reduced same. No infirmity have been pointed out in Order of A.O. before Ld. CIT(A). In absence of any representation from side of assessee, we are of view that no interference is called for in matter. 6. In result, appeal of Assessee dismissed. 4 ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar, Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi. Order pronounced in open Court. Sd/- Sd/- (O.P. KANT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Delhi, Dated 17th September, 2019 VBP/- Copy to 1. appellant 2. respondent 3. CIT(A) concerned 4. CIT concerned 5. D.R. ITAT E Bench 6. Guard File // BY Order // Asst. Registrar : ITAT Delhi Benches : Delhi. Manoj Kumar Through Legal Heir Alka v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-44(5), New Delhi
Report Error