ABHIJEET PATIL,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 2(1),, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2444/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 October 2026AY 2018-199 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's appeal was directed against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, which had dismissed the assessee's appeal concerning the penalty of Rs.1,41,910/-. The Tribunal noted that no one appeared for the assessee despite service of notices, and no adjournment application was filed. The Tribunal observed that on previous occasions also, no one had appeared for the assessee. After hearing the Learned DR and perusing the record, the Tribunal found that the AO had made an addition of Rs.2,28,562/- on account of bogus deductions and imposed a penalty of Rs.1,41,910/-. The CIT(A)/NFAC had dismissed the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)/NFAC's order to be well-reasoned and speaking. Since no material was brought to the Tribunal's notice to take a view contrary to that of the CIT(A)/NFAC, the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC was upheld. The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Abhijeet Patil, filed his return of income for assessment year 2018-19 declaring Rs.5,53,380/-. The Revenue, represented by ITO Ward-2(1), Nashik, found that the assessee claimed bogus deductions of Rs.2,28,562/- under Chapter VI-A. The case was reopened under Section 147, and a notice under Section 148 was issued. The assessee filed a revised return. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under Sections 147, 144, and 144B, adding Rs.2,28,562/- and determining total income at Rs.7,81,942/-. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A for under-reporting of income and imposed a penalty of Rs.1,41,910/-. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A)/NFAC, which dismissed the appeal. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal had to decide on the validity of the penalty of Rs.1,41,910/- imposed under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for under-reporting of income. The assessee's grounds of appeal, though not detailed, relate to this penalty. The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal. The Revenue, represented by the Addl. CIT, argued that the CIT(A)/NFAC passed a well-reasoned order and that no contrary view was brought to the Tribunal's notice. The assessee's contentions are not recorded as no one appeared for them. The Revenue relied on the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 270A

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 Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar, Addl. CIT

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.09.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2018-19. 2. None appeared for and / or on behalf of the assessee when the matter was called for hearing on 24.08.2026. No application seeking adjournment of the case has been filed. A perusal of the order sheet entries shows that on previous occasions also, no one was appearing. Under these circumstances, we deem it proper to decide this appeal on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. DR.

2

3.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a salaried person and filed his return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs.5,53,380/-. As per the information available with the Department, it was found that the assessee has claimed bogus deductions to the tune of Rs.2,28,562/- under Chapter VI-A. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened under the provisions of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 29.03.2022, in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 27.04.2022 declaring total income of Rs.5,53,380/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by making addition of Rs.2,28,562/- vide order dated 28.02.2023. He accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.7,81,942/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for under-reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs.1,41,910/- being 200% on the tax on under-reported income.

4.

The Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under:

3 4 5 6 7

5.

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

8

6.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, all these relate to the levy of penalty of Rs.1,41,910/- levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC.

7.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. We find the Ld. AO in the instant case made addition of Rs.2,28,562/- on the ground that the assessee has claimed bogus deductions to the tune of Rs.2,28,562/- under Chapter VI-A. Thereafter, he imposed the penalty of Rs.1,41,910/- being 200% on the tax on under-reported income. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for the reasons which we have already reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has passed a well reasoned and speaking order. No one has appeared before us despite service of notices. Since nothing has been brought to our notice, to take a view contrary to the view taken by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 26th October, 2026. (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 26th October, 2026 GCVSR

9 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, Sunil Kumar Kumar More //// More Date: 2026.10.26 17:20:46 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →