IN THE 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, The 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 Delhi110059. 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
the order of Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi, Dated 25.11.2016, for the
A.Y. 2012-2013, challenging the levy of penalty under
section 271(1)(c)/154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2
ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar,
Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi.
2. 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). It was pleaded that no penalty can be
imposed against the L.R. as no estate has developed on the
assessee from the deceased assessee. The Ld. CIT(A)
rejected the contention of assessee and dismissed the
appeal of assessee.
3. The assessee has been notified the date of
hearing twice through registered post. However, none
appeared on behalf of the assessee.
3
ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar,
Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi.
4. 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. Therefore, appeal of assessee rightly dismissed.
5. After considering the submissions of the Ld. D.R,
we are of the view that no interference is called for in the
matter. 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. The A.O.
in this impugned order under section 154 has merely
calculated the penalty amount finding mistake therein and
reduced the same. No infirmity have been pointed out in the
Order of the A.O. before the Ld. CIT(A). In the absence of
any representation from the side of the assessee, we are of
the view that no interference is called for in the matter.
6. In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed.
4
ITA.No.2372/Del./2017 Late Manoj Kumar,
Through L.H. Smt. Alka, New Delhi.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/-
(O.P. KANT) (BHAVNESH SAINI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Delhi, Dated 17th September, 2019
VBP/-
Copy to
1. The appellant
2. The 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.
|
