M/S. JAIHIND WEILDING AND BOILER WORK ,NASHIK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, MALEGAON, MALEGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2186/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 August 2026AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the penalty issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide it after the completion of quantum proceedings. This was done to ensure a fair adjudication based on the final quantum assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a partnership firm, had its assessment completed with additions and subsequently faced penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal against the penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be adjudicated before the finalization of the quantum appeal. The Tribunal considered the pendency of the quantum appeal as a key factor.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Mutha (virtual)
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar, Addl.CIT

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2186 & 2187/PUN/2026 Assessment years : 2009-10 & 2011-12 M/s. Jaihind Welding and Boiler Work ITO, Ward-1, 25, Manzoor Compound, Old Agra Malegaon Vs. Road, Islampura Ward, At Post – Malegaon, Dist. Nashik – 423203 PAN: AADFJ6659H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanjeev Mutha (virtual) Department by : Shri Rajesh Haladkar, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 11-08-2026 Date of pronouncement : 27-08-2026

O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM:

The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders both dated 30.01.2026 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax- Appeals, NFAC (“CIT(A) / NFAC”), Delhi relating to assessment years 2009-10 and 2011- 12 respectively. For the sake of convenience, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2.

There is a delay of 30 days in filing of both the appeals by the assessee before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed separate condonation applications along with the affidavits explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation applications filed along with the

2 ITA Nos.2186 & 2187/PUN/2026

affidavits and after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay in filing of both the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication.

ITA No.2186/PUN/2026 (A.Y. 2009-10)

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm and filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 30.09.2009 declaring total income of Rs.7,50,110/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 by making addition of Rs.87,259/- at a total income of Rs.10,97,800/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and accordingly levied penalty of Rs.78,365/- vide his order dated 21.03.2024.

4.

On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.

5.

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

6.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the quantum appeal is pending for adjudication before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. He accordingly submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC.

3 ITA Nos.2186 & 2187/PUN/2026

7.

The Ld. DR on the other hand supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC.

8.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed by the Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee. We find in the instant case the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 by making addition of Rs.87,259/- at a total income of Rs.10,97,800/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of Rs.78,365/-. The Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the quantum appeal is pending before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. It is also his submission that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue of penalty to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to decide the issue of penalty after completion of the quantum proceedings as per fact and law and after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

ITA No.2187/PUN/2026 (A.Y. 2011-12)

9.

Both the parties have unanimously consented and submitted that the facts of the case are same as narrated in the above ITA No.2186/PUN/2026 for assessment

4 ITA Nos.2186 & 2187/PUN/2026

year 2009-10. In this the case also, the assessee has challenged the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. We have already decided the issue and restored the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to decide the issue of penalty after completion of quantum proceedings. Following similar reasonings, we restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

10.

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 27th August, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (ASTHA CHANDRA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 27th August, 2026 GCVSR Gajjala Chinna Venkata Digitally signed by Gajjala Chinna Venkata Subba Reddy Subba Reddy Date: 2026.08.27 17:27:38 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

5 ITA Nos.2186 & 2187/PUN/2026

S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before 3 JM/AM the Second Member Draft discussed/approved by 4 AM/AM Second Member Approved Draft comes to the Sr. 5 Sr. PS/PS PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the 9 Office Superintendent Date on which file goes to the 10 A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 139

All 3,629 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →