MOHAN BANSILAL BHUTADA,BEED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(4), BEED, BEED

PDF · subscribers
ITA 588/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 June 2023AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings was based on an assessment order that was not in existence as the quantum appeals were restored to the CIT(A). Therefore, the penalty issue was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the NFAC's order for multiple assessment years. The issues and facts were similar across all appeals, involving penalty proceedings initiated based on an assessment order that was later set aside.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty proceedings can be sustained when the underlying assessment order, forming the basis of satisfaction, has been set aside or restored to the lower appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Digambar Surwase

आदेश / ORDER

PER BENCH :

1.

All these six appeals by the assessee against the common order dated 21-03-2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi for assessment years 2011-12, 2009-10 and 2010-11, respectively.

2.

Since, the issues raised in all these appeals are similar basing on the same identical facts, we proceed to hear all these appeals together and to pass a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

3.

First, we shall take up appeal in A.Y. 2011-12.

4.

At the outset, we note that the ld. AR, Shri Digambar Surwase placed on record consolidated order dated 14-06-2023 passed by this Tribunal in 590, 591, 594 & 596/PUN/2023 for A.Ys. 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 in assessee’s own case and submitted that this Tribunal restored all the quantum appeals to the file of CIT(A) and prayed to remand the present appeal also to the file of CIT(A). On perusal of the consolidated order dated 14-06-2023 passed by this Tribunal, we find that the quantum appeals were restored to the file of CIT(A) for disposal of appeals on merits and since, the present appeal filed against the order of AO for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, in our opinion, requires to be remand to the file of CIT(A) as for the reason that the satisfaction to initiate penalty proceedings was based on satisfaction recorded in the assessment order which was not in existence as the same quantum appeals restored to the file of CIT(A) by this Tribunal. Therefore, we deem it proper to remand the issue in the present appeal to the file of CIT(A) for its fresh examination in terms of outcome in the quantum appeals. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. , 592, 593, 595 & 597/PUN/2023.

5.

We find that the issues raised in the appeal and the facts in 592, 593, 595 & 597/PUN/2023 are identical to except the variance in amount. Since, the facts in ITA Nos.589, 592, 593, 595 & 597/PUN/2023 are similar to ITA No.588/PUN/2023, the findings given by us while deciding the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos.589, 592, 593, 595 & 597/PUN/2023, as well. Accordingly, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th June, 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 →