BHARTI DIWAKAR PAWAR,NASHIK vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENRE, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2226/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 May 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is obliged to decide an appeal on merits and cannot dismiss it for non-prosecution, following a jurisdictional High Court ruling. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-compliance without discussing the merits of the penalty order. The assessee's appeal to the ITAT was filed with a delay, which was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution instead of deciding it on merits. Whether the penalty order under Section 270A was validly levied.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 250,Section 251

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Bhagwan Potdar
For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

आदेश /ORDER PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 on 10-04-2024, emanating from the penalty order u/s. 270A of the Act.

2.

Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: 1. On the facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 66,146/- levied by the AO u/s. 270A as the same is levied without mentioning limb i.e. sub-clause of section 270A of the Act and also as the AO had accepted income returned in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 2. The appellant craves leave to add alter delete above or any other ground/s of appeal.

3.

There is a delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Mr. Ravindra Potdar, who appeared on behalf of the assessee submitted that assessee’s in-laws were hospitalized and, therefore, assessee could not file appeal in time. Considering the submissions of the assessee, we are convinced that there was sufficient cause for the delay and accordingly, the delay is condoned.

ITA No. 2226/PUN/2025

4.

In this case, Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-compliance without discussing the merits of the penalty order. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under :

Quote, “8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act. Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” Unquote. Thus, Hon’ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and CIT(A) does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, we set aside the order u/s. 250 of the Act for denovo adjudication. Assessee shall file all necessary details.

ITA No. 2226/PUN/2025

Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 21st May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 21-05-2026 TNMM आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपील र्थी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 2. 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. 5. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →