M/S.THE ELAVANCHERRY SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,PALAKKAD vs. THE DIT ( I & CI), KOCHI

The brief facts of the case are as follow: The assessee in the above case has challenged the imposition of penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) of the I.T.Act. At the very outset we notice that the assessee had raised a ground in the above appeal that the order levying penalty is ex parte order and hence bad in law. When the assessee received notice u/s 274 of the I.T.Act show causing for why penalty should not be imposed, the assessee had sought time stating that the

The learned AR, Sri.Sivadas Chittoor, has filed a written submission. The content of the same is that while imposing penalty, the assessee was not granted an opportunity of hearing. The learned D.R. supported the order of the Income- tax authorities.

We have heard the learned DR and perused the material on record. We find that in the above case, the Assessing Officer has passed penalty order without hearing the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice and equity, as a last chance, we are of the view that the assessee should be given one more opportunity of hearing in the above case. For the limited purpose of hearing the assessee and to comply with the principle of natural justice, we restore the above case to the Assessing Officer. The assessee shall co-operative with the Department and shall submit before the Assessing Officer that there is reasonable cause as mandated u/s 273B for non-levy of penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) of the I.T.Act. It is ordered accordingly.

Insofar as the ground relating to error in calculation of the quantum of penalty imposed u/s 272A(2)(c) of the I.T.Act, the assessee may file a rectification petition before the concerned Officer and rectify the mistake, if any, in the calculation of the penalty imposed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.