Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

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
                   ITA Nos
                               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,
                                        Central Circle-
New Delhi.                               ARA Centre,
PAN : AHQPR2733N.                       Jhandewalan,
                                        New Delhi.
     (Appellant)                            (Respondent)

             Appellant by         :    None.
             Respondent by        :    Smt. Parminder Kaur, Sr.DR.

                                  ORDER

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
years.







4.   In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
     Decision pronounced in the open Court on 21st October, 2014.


                 Sd/-                                 Sd/-
                  VARKEY)
          (ABY T. VARKEY)                           AGRAWAL)
                                              (G.D. AGRAWAL)
         JUDICIAL MEMBER                      VICE PRESIDENT

Dated : 21.10.2014
VK.
                                   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,
                           Circle-
                   Central Circle-11, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan,
                   New Delhi.
3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR, ITAT

                             Assistant Registrar

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting