Case Details:
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI
BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Order Details:
ITA No.447/Del/2021
Assessment Year: 2013-14
Vikas, C/o Umang Sahai Aggarwal, Advocate 505, Maitri Apartment, Opp. Metro Pillar 411, Sector-09, Rohini, New Delhi.
PAN No.AIDPV2988H Vs. ITO, Ward-5, Rohtak.
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by: None
Respondent by: Sh. M. Baranwal, CIT DR
Date of Hearing: 31/08/2022
Date of Pronouncement: 31/08/2022
ORDER
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A), Rohtak dated 30.07.2020 for A.Y.2011-12.
The solitary grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- levied u/s. 271 (1) (b) of the Act.
The roots for the levy of penalty lie in the assessment order framed u/s. 144 of the Act determining total income of the assessee at Rs.12.60 lacs. Since the assessee did not comply with the statutory notices issued by the AO, the AO proceeded by levying penalty of Rs.10,000/- u/s. 271 (1) (b) of the Act.
Though the assessee challenged the levy of penalty before the CIT(A), the assessee did not attend the appellate proceedings and the CIT(A) after considering the facts on record confirmed the penalty so levied by the AO.
Before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Despite repetitive notices, we decided to proceed ex parte. The DR was heard at length, who placed strong reliance on the orders of the lower authorities.
We have carefully perused the assessment order and the order of the first appellate authority. The undisputed fact is that the assessment order was framed ex parte u/s. 144 of the Act. It is also not in dispute that the appellate proceedings before the first appellate authority were also not attended and the CIT(A) was left with no choice but to decide the appeal ex parte.
Even before us, the assessee neither appeared in person nor through any authorized representative. This conduct of the assessee clearly shows that he is not only negligent but also does not have any respect for the judicial proceedings, therefore, we decline to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). The appeal by the assessee is dismissed.
Decision announced in the open court on 31.08.2022.
Sd/- Sd/-
(ASTHA CHANDRA) (N. K. BILLAIYA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Date:- .08.2022
Copy forwarded to:
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI
Date of dictation: 31.08.2022
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member: 31.08.2022
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other member: 31.08.2022
Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS: 31.08.2022
Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement: 31.08.2022
Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/ PS: 31.08.2022
Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT: 31.08.2022
Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk: 31.08.2022
Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
The date on which file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order.
Date of dispatch of the Order.
Why the Case Was Filed: Income Tax Appeal Case ITA 1678/DEL/2020 – Vikas vs. ITO Ward – 5, Rohtak
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform