MOHAN,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO,WARD-1, KANCHEEPURAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 980/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 November 2023AY 2016-172 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, granted the assessee another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT concerned the confirmation of a penalty under Section 271B. The assessee failed to make a representation during the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A), leading to the penalty being sustained.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) to avoid a penalty being confirmed without proper representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ&वाल ,लेखा सद) के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Mohan, ITO बनाम No.4, PSK Nagar Collectorate, Ward-1, / Vs. Kanchipuram-631 502. Kanchipuram. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. APFPM-6460-G (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri S.P.Chidambaram(Advocate)-Ld.AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri D.Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld.Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 28-11-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

The grievance of the assessee in captioned appeal is confirmation of penalty /s 271B for Rs.1.50 Lacs as levied by Ld. Assessing Officer vide order dated 29.09.2022. Though the assessee preferred further appeal, it failed to make any representation during appellate proceedings. Accordingly, the penalty was sustained against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Ld. AR, appearing for assessee, sought another opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR also undertook to substantiate its case in case another opportunity was given. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed the same. Keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, the bench deems it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case. 3. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 28th November, 2023.

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →