AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER MANISH AGARWAL, A.M.:
The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 16.10.2025 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-7/10460/2019-20 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of penalty order dated 13.11.2019 passed u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company has filed its return of income on 27.03.2018, declaring total income of INR 1,64,68,461/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 30.12.2019 however, as the assessee has not made compliance of the notices issued u/s 142(1) dated 12.04.2019 & 17.04.2019, the AO has invoked the penalty proceedings u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act and after considering the reply, penalty of INR 10,000/-was levied.
Against the said order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 16.10.2025, has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee has not given any reasonable cause for non-compliance of the notices issued u/s 142(1) dated 12.04.2019 & 17.04.2019.
Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking various grounds of appeal mentioned in the appeal memo.
Heard the contentions of both the parties at length and perused the material on record. It is observed that in the instant case, the assessee has finally filed the details before AO and after considering them, assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) in terms of the order dated 30.12.2019. Thus, it is ostensible that it is not a case where the assessment was concluded on a best judgment basis under section 144 of the Act. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act cannot be imposed.
In support of our aforesaid conclusion, reliance is placed to the on the decision of coordinate Delhi bench of Tribunal in the case of DLF Commercial Enterprises vs. ACIT, reported in (2021) 131 taxmann.com 305 (Delhi-Trib.) and of the Agra bench of Tribunal in the case of Aaryan Motels vs. DCIT reported in (2017) 88 taxmann.com 7 (Agra – Trib.).
Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, we do not find any merit in the penalty levied under section 272A(1)(d) of the Act vide order dated 22.02.2024, and the same is hereby deleted. As a result, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.