MANOJ KUNDANMAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO -19(2)(2), MUMBAI

The assessee has challenged levy of penalty of Rs.11,30,734/- on account of under reporting of income. It had been submitted that in the quantum proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) has set aside the entire matter to the file of the ld. AO for Manoj Kundanmal Jain deciding afresh. The relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- 5. The impugned assessment order was passed ex-parte u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the income tax Act as the appellant did not respond to the notices issued by the AO during the assessment proceedings. In view of the facts of the case, in my considered opinion, the interests of justice will be well-served, if the appellant is given an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the impugned order of the AO Is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for decision afresh. The Assessing Officer shall give proper opportunity to the appellant to present his case.

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Thus, when entire assessment order has been set aside to be decided afresh then, there is no question of any levy of penalty u/s.270A arising from the said quantum order. Accordingly, the penalty levied by the ld. AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is deleted.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.