KALPNA GUPTA,KANPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), KANPUR

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, dated 27.01.2026, for the AY 2011-12. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Because without considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming penalty of Rs. 8,80,472/- u/s 271(1)( c) of The Income tax Act without considering the facts and circumstances of the 2. Because without considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming penalty of Rs. 8,80,472/- u/s 271(1)(c) of The Income tax Act and passed an ex-parte order without deciding the grounds of appeal of the assessee. 3. Because without considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming penalty of

I.T.A. No. 297/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year:2011-12 2

Rs. 8,80,472/- u/s 271(1)(c) of The Income tax Act as the AO. Has issued the illegal notice under section 271(1)(c) of The Income Tax Act 1961, stating, that assessee concealed the Income. When the notice has to be specifically clear on what ground the penalty proceedings have been initiated. 4. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming penalty of Rs. 8,80,472/- u/s 271(1)(c) of The Income tax Act, as there is no concealment neither furnishing of inaccurate particulars of Income. There is only difference of opinion of the appellant and of assessing officer. 5. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) has been passed in absolute violation of the principles of Natural Justice, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore deserves to be declared a nullity.”

(B) In this case, assessment order dated 15.03.2022 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) whereby the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 32,62,583/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition of Rs. 32,47,668/- and Rs. 14,915/- were made. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 27.01.2026. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A).

(C) At the time of hearing, learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity during the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A). Therefore, he submitted that the issues in dispute should be restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass fresh appellate order, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to this.

I.T.A. No. 297/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year:2011-12 3

(D) In view of the foregoing, after hearing both sides and after due consideration of materials on record, the issues in dispute regarding aforesaid additions of Rs. 29,82,938/- and Rs. 14,915/- are restored back to the file of learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass denovo appellate order, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(E) All the grounds of appeal in present appeal are treated as disposed off in accordance with the aforesaid directions. For statistical purposes, the appeal is partly allowed.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 14/05/2026)

Sd/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Date: 14/05/2026 SK, Sr.PS

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A) Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Lucknow