PRAKASH LAXMANRAO ADKE,NASHIK vs. ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

PDF
ITA 489/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2011-123 pages

No AI summary yet for this case.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B” : PUNE

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 17.05.2023Pronounced: 25.05.2023

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1050057078(1), dated 23.02.2023, involving penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2 ITA.No.489/PUN./2023 2. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in imposing the section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.90,160/-, it emerges at the outset that the Assessing Officer’s corresponding penalty show cause notice dated 02.02.2017 issued to the taxpayer had nowhere specified or struck-off the relevant limb as to whether he had concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such an income, as the case may be. We make it clear that the “NFAC” itself has fairly reproduced the Assessing Officer’s penalty show cause notice in it’s order under challenge at page-8.

3.

Faced with the situation, we quote hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s recent landmark decision in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs. ACIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom.) (FB) has settled the law that the above stated failure on the Assessing Officer’s part indeed vitiates the entire penal proceedings itself. We thus delete the impugned penalty for this precise reason alone. Ordered accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.05.2023.

Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 25th May, 2023 VBP/-

3 ITA.No.489/PUN./2023

Copy to

1.

The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Nashik-1, Nashik. 4. The PCIT, Nashik. 4. D.R. ITAT, Pune “B” Bench, Pune 5. Guard File. //By Order//

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches Pune.

PRAKASH LAXMANRAO ADKE,NASHIK vs ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK | BharatTax