Shri Hiralal Rathi, F-12, Ladosarai,Old M.B. Road,New Delhi.Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Central Circle-ARA Centre, Jhandewalan,New Delhi.
October, 29th 2014
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
`C' : NEW DELHI
DELHI BENCH `C
BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND
VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SHRI ABY T. VARKEY,
Nos.4829/Del/2013 to 4832/Del/2013
Years : 2007-
Assessment Years 2010-11
2007-08 to 2010-
Shri Hiralal Rathi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
F-12, Ladosarai, Income Tax,
Old M.B. Road, Circle-11,
New Delhi. ARA Centre,
PAN : AHQPR2733N. Jhandewalan,
Appellant by : None.
Respondent by : Smt. Parminder Kaur, Sr.DR.
PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP :
These appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of
learned CIT(A)-XXXI, New Delhi dated 25th September, 2013 for the AY
2007-08 to 2010-11.
2. The only ground raised by the assessee in these appeals is
against the levy of penalty of `10,000/- under Section 271(1)(b) of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 for each assessment year.
3. We have heard the arguments of learned DR and perused
relevant material placed before us. From a perusal of the penalty
order, it is evident that in all the four years, the Assessing Officer has
levied the penalty for failure of the assessee to comply with the notice
dated 5th December, 2011. However, from the penalty order, it is
2 ITA-4829 to 4832/D/2013
noticed that the notice dated 5th December, 2011 was sent by post.
The date of service of the notice is not mentioned in the penalty order
of any of the year. The assessee was asked to make compliance on or
before 15th December, 2011. Therefore, now the limited question
before us is whether the Assessing Officer had allowed adequate time
to the assessee to comply with the notice dated 5th December, 2011?
The Assessing Officer has not given the date of service of notice,
therefore, even if we presume that the notice was served within the
period of five days from the date of notice, then, the notice would have
been served by 10th December, 2011 and the assessee was required to
submit the details by 15th December, 2011. Thus, the time allowed for
complying with the notice was less than a week which cannot be said
to be an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. When
the Assessing Officer has not allowed adequate time to the assessee to
comply with the notice dated 5th December, 2011, in our opinion, the
penalty under Section 271(1)(b) could not be levied for non-compliance
of such notice because the Assessing Officer himself has not allowed
adequate time to make necessary compliance. We, therefore, cancel
the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act in all the four
4. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
Decision pronounced in the open Court on 21st October, 2014.
(ABY T. VARKEY) AGRAWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
Dated : 21.10.2014
3 ITA-4829 to 4832/D/2013
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant : Shri Hiralal Rathi,
F-12, Ladosarai, Old M.B. Road, New Delhi.
2. Respondent : Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Circle-11, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan,
5. DR, ITAT