SHRI MAHENDRA SINGH CHARAN,BEAWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BEAWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1141/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 February 2021AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum appeal was restored to the AO, the penalty appeal should also be restored to the AO for fresh decision. The AO was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee's quantum appeal for the same assessment year had been set aside to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The AO had not yet decided the quantum appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be decided independently or be restored to the AO pending the decision on the quantum appeal.

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, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1141/JP/2019

Hearing: 03/02/2021Pronounced: 15/02/2021

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A), Ajmer dated 22/07/2019 for the A.Y. 2014-15 in the matter of imposition of penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic.

3.

None has appeared on behalf of assessee but at the time of hearing, the assessee filed an application stating the fact that the quantum appeal being has been set aside by the ITAT to the file of A.O. for deciding the issue afresh vide its order dated 20/09/2019 and the 2 ITA 1141/JP/2019_ Shri Mahendra Singh Charan Vs ITO A.O. has not decided the appeal as yet, therefore, he requested to keep the appeal in abeyance till A.O’s order in the quantum appeal.

4.

On the contrary, the ld DR has submitted that since the quantum appeal has been restored to the file of A.O., therefore, this appeal is also to be set aside to the file of the A.O. for deciding the matter afresh qua the penalty imposed.

5.

After having considered the rival contentions of both the parties as well as material placed on record, we are of the considered view that since the quantum appeal of the assessee has already been set aside to the file of the A.O. by the Coordinate bench of this Tribunal vide its order dated 20/09/2019 and the A.O. has not decided the appeal as yet, therefore, the present appeal regarding the imposition of penalty is also restored back to the file of the A.O. for deciding the issue afresh after providing reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

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 →