Pawan International v. ITO (Chd)(Trib) (UR)

S. 272A : Penalty – Failure to answer questions – Sign statements – Furnish information – Substantial compliance – Levy of penalty is not justified. [S. 143(3), 272A(1)(d)]

Assessee for non-compliance of notices issued during the course of assessment proceedings. Assessee submitted that it made necessary compliances to various notices and also in many cases, it was granted less than two days to respond to notices, which was clear violation of principles of natural justice. Assessee further submitted that as it substantially complied with various notices and assessment was completed under section 143(3), the penalty so levied was to be deleted. Assessee had responded to notices by furnishing necessary information/documentation during the course of assessment proceedings and supporting evidences were placed on record, therefore, there could not be any basis for levy of penalty as far as non-compliance of said notices were concerned. Further three notices were issued, whereby assessee was asked to comply within a period of two hours and that too, on a day which was a public holiday, i.e. Sunday. Thus, it was clear that AO for reasons best known to him, issued three notices one after the another, and that too, on the day, which was a public holiday and asking the assessee to respond to said notices within period of two hours, which was evidently not reasonable and in any case, could not be a basis to press charges as far as deliberate non-compliance on the part of assessee. Further, considering the fact that substantial compliances were made by assessee and assessment was completed under section 143(3), there was no justifiable basis for levy of penalty under section 272A(1)(d) and hence, the penalty so levied, was deleted. [ITA No. 364/Chd/2023 dated 05/03/2024] (AY. 2017-18)

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*