SMT. RAJNI Vs. ITO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessed is in appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) -IX, New Delhi, in appeal No. 202/98 -99, dated 31 -7 -2000. The grounds of appeal are as given below :

(2.) THE learned Commissioner (Appeals) is not correct in stating that penalty notices issued remained uncompleted with because notices dated 24 -12 -1996 and 13 -5 -1997, were not received by the appellant. Letter dated 3 -6 -1997, fixing the case for 10 -6 -1997 (though received on 11 -6 -1997, i.e., after the date of hearing), was duly complied with as admitted by the assessing officer in the penalty order. It is, Therefore, prayed that the penalty imposed may kindly be cancelled. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessed had filed a return of income of Rs. 60,669. The return was processed under section 143(l)(a) and penalty proceedings under section 271A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 274, were initiated for non -maintenance of books of account, as the assessed's income exceeded the threshold limit of Rs. 40,000. A show -cause notice under section 271A read with section 274 was' issued on 24 -12 -1996. This notice was not complied with. A second show -cause notice was issued on 13 -5 -1997, for compliance on 23 -5 -1997. This notice was served on 19 -5 -1997. This notice was also not complied with. As the assessed had not filed trading a/c, P&L a/c and balance sheet along with return of income, and as assessed did not comply with the two show -cause notices issued, the assessing officer concluded that the assessed had no reasonable Explanation to offer for non -maintenance of books of account as per the requirement of section 44AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A penalty of Rs. 6,000 was levied vide order dated 26 -6 -1997.

(3.) COMMISSIONER (Appeals) confirmed the penalty against which the assessed is now in appeal before us.