MR. SANJIV KUMAR ARORA ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 27(3), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai.
Before: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Arora House No. 4E, Asalfa Near Ghatkopar W Mumbai-400 084. Vs. ITO Ward 27(3)(2) Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra E Mumbai-400 051. PAN : AMGPA0936K
Per Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) :-
In the above cited appeal, the Ld. AO levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act regarding cash deposited into the bank account which was not explained. From the penalty order, it is observed that the appellant has not explained the source for the cash deposited into the bank account and there was no expense from the appellant. Accordingly, assessment was completed by making addition of Rs. 28,40,000/- treating the same as unexplained cash credit. While completing the assessment the penalty proceedings were initiated under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Then the Ld. AO issued a show-cause notice asking the appellant as to why penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act should not be levied. The Ld. AO gave time to the appellant to submit his explanation on or before 16.5.2019. since no reply was submitted by the appellant, minimum penalty of Rs.
7,27,180/- was levied on the appellant and the penalty proceedings were completed. After obtaining penalty order, appellant filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and from the order of Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that six opportunities were given to file objections for levy of penalty and there is no response to any of these hearing notices. Since there was no reply from the Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Arora
2
appellant, Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty after mentioning several cases law for the proposition that in case of failure to file reply despite several opportunities, addition should be confirmed.
Aggrieved by this orders of Ld. AO as well as Ld. CIT(A), the appellant filed an appeal before the ITAT with single ground of appeal as follows :-
“The Learned Income Tax Officer has erred in law levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the of Rs. 7,27,180/-.”
During the hearing before the ITAT, Ld. AR of the appellant has requested for giving one more opportunity so that all the details would be furnished. In view of the fact that the assessment order was also ex-parte order, the Bench has decided to give one last opportunity to file all the submissions before Ld. CIT(A). The issue is remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). As Ld. CIT(A) has given several opportunity already, one final opportunity may be given to file his submissions with regard to the penalty levied which is the subject matter. Appellant is directed to cooperate with Ld. CIT(A) and furnish all evidences and submissions without fail.
The appeal of appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/07/2025. (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file.
Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Arora
BY ORDER,
////
(