ADIL MOHSIN MAGAR,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 41(1)(1), MUMBAI (PREVIOUSLY ITO WARD 26(1)(1), MUMBAI), MUMBAI

The Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the impugned appeal relates to the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act and the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte, without hearing the assessee. The learned AR submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee against quantum assessment proceedings was also disposed of ex- parte by the learned CIT(A), against which the assessee had prepared an appeal before the ITAT. The said appeal numbered as has since been disposed of by the Tribunal, vide its order dated 8.11.2023 by restoring the issues urged in the quantum appeal to the 2 Adil Mohsin Magar file of the learned CIT(A). The Learned AR submitted that the decision taken by Ld CIT(A) in the quantum appeal will have bearing on impugned penalty order. Accordingly, the Ld A.R prayed that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) against the impugned penalty order may set aside and all the issues may be restored to his file for adjudicating them afresh.

We heard learned DR and perused the record. Since the order passed by the learned CIT(A) in the quantum assessment proceedings has been restored to his file by the co-ordinate bench for adjudicating it afresh and since the order passed thereon by Ld CIT(A) in that appeal will have bearing on the impugned penalty order, there is merit in the prayer put forth by Ld A.R. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed.