ANNAMMA SAMKUTTY,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(4),, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld.AO initiated the penal proceedings u/sec 271(1)(C) of the Act for concealment of income. In respect of the addition of ₹. 10,00,000/- u/sec 69 of the Act for unexplained income. 3. the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in alw and on facts in confirming the action of Ld.AO in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(X) of the Act. 4. The appellant carves leaves to add, amend, alter, edit, delete modify or chance all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the Assessing Officer has received information under Risk Management Strategy through ITBA under the head “RMS-Non-Filing of Return PAN Cases” that the assessee has purchased immovable property in the F.Y.2015-16 and the assessee has not filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2016-17. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148(A)(b) of the Act and the assessee has filed the response. The A.O subsequently passed order under Clause (d) of section 148A of the I.T. Act on 14.03.2023 and issued notice under Section 148 of the Act. In compliance to the notice, the assessee has filed return of income on 20.03.2023 disclosing a total income of Rs. NIL. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued to the assessee to explain the sources of purchase of immovable property. The assessee has filed the response on 23.06.2023 and 30.06.2023 explaining the sources of acquisition of the property. Whereas the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanations on the sources to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- and made addition u/sec69A of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs. 10,00,000/- and passed the order u/sec147 r.w.s144B of the Act dated 31.12.2023. Subsequently the Assessing officer issued penalty notice u/sec274 r.w.s u/sec271(1)(c) of the Act and there was no compliance and the A.O has levied penalty of Rs.3,09,000/- vide order u/sec271(1)(c) of the Act dated 14.06.2024. 3. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statements of facts and finding of the AO and issued notice of hearings and since there was no compliance by the assessee to the notices, therefore, CIT(A) considering information on record has confirmed the action of the AO and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 4. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and notices were issued. Therefore, CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismiss the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the Assessing Officer levying the penalty u/sec271(1)(c) of the Act. Whereas the CIT(A) has issued notices on various dates referred at Page 3 Para 3 of the order but there was no response. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the levy of penalty by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance/ non compliance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, We considering the facts, circumstances, submissions and principles of natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, We set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.