SREE SARAVANABALAJI TEXTILES (P) LTD,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CORP CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that penalty levy is not automatic and set aside the ex-parte orders. The cases were remanded to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with an opportunity for the assessee to defend its case.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against the confirmation of penalty under Section 270A for two assessment years. The CIT(A) had confirmed the penalty ex-parte, considering the assessee's acceptance of the assessment as proof of mens rea.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 270A was correctly levied ex-parte without providing the assessee an adequate opportunity to defend its case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aggrieved by confirmation of certain penalty u/s 270A for captioned assessment years, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The impugned orders are ex-parte order wherein Ld. CIT(A) held that since assessment was accepted by the assessee, the same would prove mens rea on the part of the assessee and the penalty was confirmed in both the years. Aggrieved the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
We are of the considered opinion the levy of penalty is not automatic. Therefore, impugned orders are set-aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication by way of speaking order with a direction to the assessee to defend its case. 3. Both the appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 18th May, 2023.
More judgments on Section 270A
- Kamleshkumar Somalal Bhatt, Himatnagar vs Income Tax Ofifcer, Ward 1, HimatnagarITA 2130/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Kkg Associates, Visakhapatnam vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)…ITA 345/VIZ/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shamsunder Pritesh Malode, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-12(1), HyderabadITA 399/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Rama Naidu Gutha, Anantapur vs ITO, Ward -1, AnantapurITA 1895/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
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