MEETU BANSAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 114/DDN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun24 July 2023AY 2007-084 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the High Court had remanded the quantum appeal to the first appellate authority. Following the assessee's request and the Department's no objection, the penalty proceedings were also remanded back to the first appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) for AY 2007-08. The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was dismissed, leading to a further appeal to the High Court.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty proceedings should be remanded along with the quantum appeal when the latter is remanded by the High Court to the first appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

Hearing: 24.07.2023Pronounced: 24.07.2023

ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 22.05.2019 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) –IV, Kanpur, confirming the penalty imposed of Rs. 1,43,900/- under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2007-08.

2.

When the appeal was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the assessee has furnished a letter in the office of the Tribunal, stating as under:

3.

We have heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the materials on record. As could be seen from the contents of assessee’s letter reproduced above and the accompanying judgment of the Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court, against the appellate order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the 2 | P a g e appeal of the assessee, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Hon’ble High Court under section 260A of the Act.

While deciding the said appeal in judgment dated 17th April, 2023 in Income Tax Appeal No.07 of 2022, the Hon’ble High Court has remanded the matter back to learned first appellate authority for fresh adjudication of the appeal. It is the submission of the assessee that, since, the quantum appeal has been remanded back to the first appellate authority and is pending adjudication, the penalty proceedings should also be remanded back to the first appellate authority, pending decision to be taken in the quantum proceeding.

4.

Learned Departmental Representative did not express any objection to the aforesaid request of the assessee.

5.

In view of the aforesaid, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the issue relating to imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act to the file of learned first appellate authority for deciding afresh after completion of the quantum proceeding pending adjudication before him. Needless to mention, the assessee must be provided due and reasonable opportunity of being heard before deciding the appeal. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 24th July, 2023

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →