DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR, BILASPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 372/RPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 May 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) must adjudicate all grounds of appeal. Since the legal grounds were not adjudicated, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside and the matter was remitted for de-novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, while the assessee filed a cross-objection raising additional grounds. The CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate these legal grounds raised by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the additional grounds of appeal concerning the validity of penalty imposition due to lack of prior approval and specific issues in the show cause notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 274,Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “DB”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY & Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Khatri, CA
For Respondent: Shri CH. Rajeswara Reddy, Sr
Hearing: 12/05/2026

PER BENCH :

ITA No. 371/RPR/2025 and CO No. 14/RPR/2025 for Assessment year 2017-18 were heard together and are decided by this common order. Similarly, ITA No. 372/RPR/2025 and CO No.15/RPR/2025 for Assessment Year 2018-19 were heard together and are decided by this common order as issue involved in these cases are same. We will take up ITA No. 371/RPR/20256 and CO No. 14/RPR/2025 as lead case.

2.

The ITA No. 371/RPR/2025 filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (NFAC) under section 250 r.w.s 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for assessment year (AY) 2017-18 passed on 26.03.2025. 3. The assessee has filed a Cross Objection No. 14/RPR/2025 against the order of Ld.CIT(A) under section 250 r.w.s 254 of the Act for AY 2017-18 dated 26.03.2025. In CO, the assessee has raised following grounds, as additional grounds of appeal:

“8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating Additional Ground No.2 dated 04.12.2024 raising the grievance that the order imposing penalty was passed without taking prior approval from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, as mandatorily required to be taken under Section 274(2)(b).

9.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating Additional Ground No.3 dated 04.12.2024 raising the grievance that the order imposing penalty was passed South Eastern Coalfield Ltd. without specifying specific issues in the show cause notice issued under section 274. 10. Without prejudice to the above, that on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO in violation of principles of natural justice and without application of mind, levied penalty under section 270A for “underreporting in consequence of misreporting of income” without specifying any of the limb or sub-clause of section 270A(9) in the penalty show-cause notice rendering penalty order passed by him bad-in-law, which is liable to be quashed.”

4.

It is observed that the assessee had raised legal grounds and contended that the legal grounds raised by the assessee has not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) under section 250 r.w.s. 245 of the Act. It is mandatory for Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. In this case, the Legal grounds have not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication with a direction to adjudicate the Legal grounds raised by the assessee. It is also directed that the Ld. CIT(A) shall provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee shall file all the necessary details before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, CO of the assessee is allowed.

5.

Since, in this case, we have set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) to Ld.CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No.371/RPR/2025 becomes academic in nature, accordingly, ITA No.371/RPR/2025 is dismissed as un-adjudicated.

South Eastern Coalfield Ltd.

6.

In CO No. 15/RPR/2025 for assessment year 2018-9, facts are identical to CO No. 14/RPR/2025, therefore, our decision in CO 14/RPR /2025 will apply mutatis mutandis.

7.

In the result, the CO Nos. 14 and 15/RPR/2025 are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No. 371 and 372/RPR/2025 are dismissed as un-adjudicated.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14/05/2026. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) "ाियक सद" / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; िदनांक Dated 14/05/2026 HKS, PS आदेशकी "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant

2.

""थ"/ The Respondent

3.

The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, Digitally signed Hem Kumari by Hem Kumari Shrivastava, Shrivastava, PS, //// PS, ITAT, ITAT, Raipur Date: 2026.05.15 Raipur 11:19:46 +05'30' (Private Secretary) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur

4

More judgments on Section 274

All 4,894 judgments and leading authorities on Section 274 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →