YOGITA KAILAS BELVALKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO-20(3)(1), MUMABI

The present appeal preferred by the Assessee is directed against the Order, dated 30/09/2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] whereby the Learned CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal against the order, dated 26/09/2024, passed under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], for the Assessment Year 2019-2020. 2. By the way of present appeal, the Assessee has challenged the order of the Learned CIT(A) confirming the levy of penalty of INR.10,000/- under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act. When the Assessment Year: 2019-2020 appeal was taken up for hearing the Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee was not able to make proper representation either before the Assessing Officer or the Learned CIT(A) and therefore, requested that one more opportunity be granted to the Assessee to make proper representation before the Ld.CIT(A). She also placed on record the Order, dated 30/09/2025, passed by the First Appellate Authority in quantum appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2019-2020 whereby the additions made by the Assessing Officer were deleted.

Per contra the Learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) be sustained as the Assessee has failed to provide any explanation for deletion of the penalty levied under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act.

We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the material on record. The Assessee has filed affidavit explaining the circumstances in which the Assessee failed to comply with the notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act, during the assessment proceedings. In our view, the same requires consideration. Since, the Assessee was proceeded ex-parte by the Learned CIT(A), we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by the Learned CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of the Learned CIT(A) with the directions to adjudicate the same after taking into consideration the submissions/explanations now offered by the Assessee. The Assessee has directed to place before the Learned CIT(A) the affidavit along with the supporting documents, if any, to support contentions that no penalty was leviable under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act. In terms of the aforesaid, the grounds raised by the Assessee are treated as allowed for the statistical purposes.

In the result the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Mumbai 6. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file.