SMT. RENU TYAGI,GURUGRAM vs. ITO WARD 3(5), GURUGRAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 309/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 June 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the quantum appeal of the assessee, ITA No. 308/Del/2025, was still pending and yet to attain finality. Considering this factual position, the Tribunal restored the penalty appeal back to the Assessing Officer to await the final outcome of the quantum appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arises from penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee remained ex-parte during the hearing. The departmental representative argued that the lower authorities rightly held the assessee to have concealed income and furnished inaccurate particulars.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal can be decided when the quantum appeal on the merits of the income is still pending finality.

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, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

Hearing: 30.06.2025Pronounced: 30.06.2025

Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. ITO, Smt. Renu Tyagi, Tower-G, Flat 001, Ward-3(5), Bestech Park View Ananda, Gurgaon Sector-81, Gurgaon, Haryana PAN: ASXPK6470H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 30.06.2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070458893(1), dated 19.11.2024 involving proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

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

2.

Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities herein have rightly held the assessee to have concealed as well as furnished inaccurate particulars of her taxable income; in the Assessing Officer’s order dated 01.06.2018 thereby levying the impugned section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.31,56,880/- and upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

3.

It is in this factual backdrop that we sought to verify the final outcome of the corresponding quantum proceedings in the assessee’s case. It transpires that the assessee’s quantum appeal pending before this tribunal is yet to attain finality. That being the clinching factual position, we are of the considered view that the assessee’s instant penalty appeal deserves to be restored back to the learned Assessing Officer so as to wait for final outcome of her above quantum appeal in the larger interest of justice. We order accordingly. All other remaining issues on merits are left open to be decided at the appropriate stage in accordance with law.

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 →