NEETA PARESH KHARDE,NASHIK vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 518/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 August 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had set aside the assessment order in the quantum appeal and restored the issue to the AO. Therefore, the penalty issue was also restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income for AY 2018-19 despite selling property and receiving interest income. The AO assessed the income and levied a penalty under Section 270A for underreporting. The CIT(A) sustained the penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 270A can be sustained when the assessment order itself was set aside and restored to the AO. The issue of underreporting of income needs to be adjudicated afresh.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 270A,Section 251(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 20.08.2026Pronounced: 25.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE BENCH “B” BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No. 518/PUN/2026 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Neeta PareshKharde, ITO, Ward-1, Flat No. 2, guru KandriyaRajaswaBhavan, Residency, Takli Road, GadkariChowk, Gandhi Nagar, Vs. Nashik-422001, Old Agra Road, Maharashtra. Nashik-4222002, PAN: ASXPK9833C Maharashtra.

(Appellant) (Respondent)

For Assessee : Shri.Chanmay Pathak.AR For Revenue : Ms. Bhavya. I.V. Sr.DR

Date of Hearing : 20.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 25.08.2026

ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi passed u/sec250 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the Income Tax Department has received information that the assessee has sold immovable property and received interest income on deposits in F.Y.2017-18 and the assessee has not filed return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and fallowed the due process of law and issued notice under Section 148 of the Act and subsequently, the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee, in compliance to the notice the assessee has filed the submissions on various dates. The Assessing officer(A.O) has dealt on the facts and information and found that the assessee has explained the details regarding immovable property transactions and receipt of interest income, along with computation of income and other documentary evidences such as sale deed, bank statements etc and the Assessing officer has determined the net profit and assessed the total income of Rs. 51,57,646/- and passed the order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act dated 27.02.2023.Subsequently, the A.O has initiated penalty proceedings and issued notice under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act and the assessee was provided opportunity to explain the reasons of underreporting of income and the assessee has not filed the explanations. Finally the AO has levied a penalty of Rs.7,57,125/- and passed the order under Section 270A of the Act dated 22.08.2023. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, submissions of the assessee and findings of assessing officer, but has sustained the levy of penalty by the AO and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A), assessee has filed the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.

4.

At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the A.O in levying of penalty overlooking the facts and information. Further the Ld.AR mentioned that in the quantum appeal, against the A.O order i.e filling of the appeal with the CIT(A). the first appellate authority has restored the issues to the file of the assessing officer u/sec251(1)(a) of the Act and hence the penalty cannot be sustained and in any case, the penalty matter may be restored to the A.O and the Ld.AR supported the submissions with the copy of the CIT(A) order. Per Contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole matrix of the dispute envisaged by the Ld.AR that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining levy of penalty u/sec.270A of the Act, though the assessee has not under reported any income.The Ld.AR mentioned that in the quantum appeal, against the A.O order i.e on filling the appeal with the CIT(A), the CIT(A) considering the information on record observed that since the assessment was completed u/sec147 r.w.s144 of the Act and relied on the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the Act and has set-aside the assessment order and restore the issues to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. Since, the disputed issues in the quantum appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer by the CIT(A). We consider it appropriate to restore penalty issue also to the file of the Assessing officer and adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information. And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 25th August, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- DIPAK P. RIPOTE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Pune; दिन ांक / Dated: 25th August, 2026 Abhishek Mohan Digitally signed by Abhishek Abhishek Mohan Mohan Date: 2026.08.25 15:23:24 +05'30' आिेशकीप्रतितितिअग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अिीि र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. तिभ गीयप्रतितनति,आयकरअिीिीयअतिकरण, “B” बेंच, पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. ग र्डफ़ इि / Guard File. 5. //True Copy//

आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, Assistant Registrar, आयकरअिीिीयअतिकरण,/ ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →