Penalty 271(1)(b) deleted as assessee had furnished medical certificate of treatment for depression and AO did not bring anything against the evidences of ill-health.
ABACUS Case Law Citation
ABCAUS 3354 (2020) (08) ITAT
In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in confirming he levy of penalty of Rs.10,000/- u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of trading. The assessee filed the return of income which processed u/s 143(1).
Thereafter, on the basis of information received from the Sales Tax Department, the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act to the assessee for which there was no compliance.
The AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act and a show cause notice was issued along with another notice u/s 142(1) of the Act.
However, again there was no response to the show cause notice and therefore the Assessing Officer imposed the penalty of Rs.10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act in the hands of the assessee.
The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty as imposed/levied by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved with the decision of the CIT(A), the assessee went in appeal to ITAT.
The Tribunal noted that as per records, the assessee had submitted before the Assessing Officer a medical certificate from a doctor stating that the assessee was under his treatment for depression with anxiety disorder for the last two years.
However, the Assessing Officer still levied the penalty saying that the said medical certificate was not sufficient reason for non-compliance of the notice.
The Tribunal opined that the Assessing Officer had absolutely overlooked the facts on record which were genuine. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) had brought on record anything against the evidences furnished by the assessee regarding his ill-health.
The Tribunal held that the case was not fit for imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act and accordingly deleted the penalty.
There is no statutory requirement of pre-deposit for stay of demand under Income Tax Act - High Court stayed demand …
Engagement of Company Secretaries (CS) as Young Professionals in the Office of Regional Director (WR), Registrar of Companies, Mumbai and…
Applicability of provisions of Section 115BBE read with Section 69, 69A and 69C in a case arising before Settlement Commission…
Addition u/s 68 for jewellery purportedly received on death of grandparent under Will upheld. In a recent judgment, ITAT upheld…
Supreme Court lays down tests to determine whether a debt is a financial debt or an operational debt under IBC…
Merely because directors of two companies were common not mean that deposits received was bogus and companies were shell companies…