BADRI PRASAD RAM GOPAL DALL MILL,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALWAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the matter was not decided on merits by the CIT(A) and that the assessee expressed an intent to resolve the dispute via the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order. The assessee did not appear for hearings before the CIT(A) and the ITAT, citing contemplation of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is sustainable when the assessee has not been provided with a proper opportunity to present its case and is considering a settlement scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 91/JP/2018
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 91/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :1998-99 cuke M/s Badri Prasad Ram Gopal Dall ITO, Vs. Mill 18, Clock Tower, Alwar Ward-2(2), Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFB3625L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Add.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 31/08/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 03/09/2020 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)- 22, Alwar dated 29.11.2017 for Assessment Year 1998-99 confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
The hearing of the matter was scheduled for today through video conferencing in view of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic situation prevailing in the country. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, an adjournment application was received by the Registry through email where the A/R of the assessee has sought adjournment in the matter stating that the assessee is contemplating to opt for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. M/s Badri Prasad Ram Gopal Dall Mill Vs. ITO, Alwar 3. The ld. DR drawn our reference to the order of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that on as many as four occasions, the assessee was provided reasonable opportunity by the ld. CIT(A) but the assessee has not even bothered to either respond or attend to the appellate proceedings. It was further submitted that there is nothing on record which shows that the assessee has moved an application seeking settlement of impugned dispute under the VSVS Scheme. It was accordingly submitted that more than adequate opportunity has been provided by the ld. CIT(A) and the matter has accordingly been decided by the ld CIT(A) and the same should therefore be confirmed.
We have heard the ld DR and purused the material available on record. We find that the matter has been listed for hearing on couple of occasions by the ld CIT(A) and has been adjourned from time to time. We believe that the assessee cannot sit back and relax merely by filing its appeal and needs to be vigilant and responsive to attend to the notices issued by the appellate authorities and non-attending to the proceedings and not responding to the notices cannot be encouraged as the same burdened and clogs the judicial system. At the same time, we find that there is no finding recorded by the ld CIT(A) and the matter has been decided by the ld CIT(A) summarily without deciding on merits. Given that the assessee through its authorized representative has stated that it is contemplating filing an application under VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME in the near future and thus intend to end this litigation though nothing has been brought on record to this effect, we find that no useful purpose would be served in granting further adjournment in the matter. At the same time, given that the matter has not been decided on merits, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of the ld CIT(A) to provide one more opportunity to the assessee, should the assessee wishes to avail of the same. This will not prejudice the right of the assessee M/s Badri Prasad Ram Gopal Dall Mill Vs. ITO, Alwar in availing of the aforesaid settlement scheme. Where the assessee so decides to opt for the scheme and has taken necessary steps as so specified therein, he can bring the same to the notice of the ld CIT(A) who shall then decide and take appropriate action as per law.
With the aforesaid directions, the matter is set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(A) who shall decide the same afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/09/2020.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026