RAJENDAR ORUGANTI,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, WARANGAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1153/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 January 2021AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the penalty order was passed ex parte and, in the interest of justice, remanded the issue back to the Assessing Officer. The assessee was directed to furnish an explanation for non-compliance, and the AO was to reconsider the matter.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices. The assessee's appeals regarding quantum additions and a Section 271(1)(c) penalty had been set aside by the Tribunal. The penalty order under Section 271(1)(b) was passed ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices should be sustained when the assessment order and other penalty appeals were set aside, and the penalty order itself was ex parte.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘A’ BENCH : Hyderabad

Before: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Hearing: 07/01/2021Pronounced: 08/01/2021

O R D E R PER Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This is assessee’s appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad dated 09.05.2019 confirming the penalty levied by the A.O. u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for short).

2.

Ld.Counsel for assessee submitted that A.O. had also levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and that the assessee’s appeals on appeal against the quantum addition made by the A.O. and the 271(1)(c )penalty appeals have been set aside to the file of A.O. by this Tribunal. He therefore prayed that this appeal also may be remitted to the file of A.O.

3.

Ld.DR however submitted that this is an appeal against the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for non-compliance of notices and therefore the outcome of assessment order which has been set aside will have no effect on this appeal.

1.

ITA 1153/Hyd/2019 AY 2010-11 Rajendra Oruganti 4. Having regard to the rival contentions, we find that the order u/s 271(1)(b) has been passed ex parte the assessee since assessee did not appear and furnish his explanation and the CIT(A)’s order also is ex parte the assessee.

4.1. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand this issue also to the file of AO with a direction to the assessee to furnish his explanation for non-compliance before the AO and thereafter, AO shall reconsider the issue in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced on 08th January, 2021.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(b)

All 2,912 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →