|
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3985 (Pune-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(b)
Where assessee had submitted before AO a medical certificate stating that assessee was under his treatment for depression with anxiety disorder for the last two years and AO still levied penalty saying that this was not sufficient reason for non-compliance of notice and therefore, AO has absolutely overlooked the facts on record which were genuine, thus, imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(b) was not warranted.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(b) - Assessee not complied with notice issued under section 142(1) requiring assessee to furnish certain information - Reasonable cause -
Assessee was engaged in the business of trading in building material, steel binding work, etc. AO noticed that assessee did not comply with notice issued under section 142(1) requiring the assessee to furnish certain information. AO initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(b) and show cause notice was issued along with notice under section 142(1). That there was no response to the show cause notice issued and AO imposed penalty under section 271(1)(b). It was the case of assessee that the said notice could not be complied since assessee was suffering from acute depression and was in psychosomatic condition. Assessee was under the continuous medical treatment and assessee also produced medical certificates issued by doctor in support of her problem before AO. Held: Department could not bring out any evidence nor could establish that the facts in assessee's own case in assessment year 2009-10 [[ITA No. 1608/PUN/2017, dt. 29-7-2020]] was something different as compared to these appeals of the assessee. As already taken for assessment year 2009-10 assessee had submitted before AO a medical certificate stating that assessee was under his treatment for depression with anxiety disorder for last two years. AO still levied the penalty saying that this was not sufficient reason for non-compliance of notice and therefore, AO had absolutely overlooked the facts on record which are genuine. Therefore, this was not a fit case for imposition of penalty under section. 271(1)(b).
Followed:Rupali Sanjay Bedmutha v. ITO [ITA No. 1608/PUN/2017, dt. 29-7-2020]
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2009-10 to 2011-12
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271F
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT |