CHINTPURNI SCHOOL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY ()
PER BENCH
These appeals by the assessee are directed against separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-47,
Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment years 2012-13 to 2020-21, in relation to penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act,
1961 (in short ‘the Act’). As common issue in dispute of penalty levied by the Assessing Officer is disputed in all these appeals, therefore, same were consolidated order.
2. We have heard the relevant material assessee has filed a under:
1) The Learne
Learned Asse made in the that these a passed u/s. 1
3. Before us, the l incriminating materi and additions have Therefore, the additi assessee did not disp
Ld. counsel for the levied by the AO is incriminating materi basis. But we find th qua the assessee as t evidence in support finding of the Ld. CIT as under:
“6.0 Opportu
Chintpurni S
ITA Nos.
heard together and disposed of rival submissions of the parti ls on record. Before us, the Ld.
an additional ground in all th ed CIT(A) has erred in confirming the act essing officer in levying penalty on the assessment order, without appreciating addition itself are not sustainable in 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Income Tax Act, ld. counsel for the assessee su ial has been referred in the as been made merely on the ion itself is not sustainable in pute the addition in quantum p assessee accordingly submitte not sustainable, both on the ial as well as addition made o hat the Ld. CIT(A) has passed th the assessee failed to furnish an t of its contention. The releva
T(A) in assessment year 2012-1
unity of hearing granted:
School Educational Society
2
6583 to 6591/MUM/2024
ff by way of this ies and perused counsel for the hese appeals as tion of the e addition g the fact the order t, 1961. bmitted that no ssessment order estimate basis.
law though the proceedings. The ed that penalty e ground of no on the estimate e order ex-parte ny documentary ant part of the 3 is reproduced
1 During th hearing notice is pertinent th a number of sent to the a 07.06.2023, 01.12.2023, 2 from the appe matter. There appellant, it operatively pu appellant has appellant ha productive ma appeal is a documents/d 6.2 I have car the order of th the case th documentary connection wi account of re facts, I decide in the penalty appeal matter 3.1 The Ld. counse assessee will file a represented before th him. We find that in and only returns wer In the facts and circ substantial justice, opportunity to the evidence to support raise the additional admitted/adjudicated Chintpurni S ITA Nos.
he course of appellate proceedings, a es u/s 250 of the Act were issued to the a hat in order to decide this appeal in a tim notices/ communications through ITBA p appellant, viz. communications dated 1
14.09.2023, 26.09.2023, 09.10.2023, 1
22.12.2023. However, there has been n ellant till date except the written note filed is no gainsaying that once the appeal is f is obligatory on its part to purposeful ursue the same in a worthwhile manner s evidently failed to do. It clearly appea as not bothered to pursue this appe anner. Hence, in view of the aforesaid, adjudicated and disposed off, on details available on record, which is as un refully perused the facts of the appellant he Assessing Officer. It is observed from hat the appellant has failed to fu evidence to the issue raised by him in th ith penalty levied by the AO on addition eceipt of Rs 4,10,00,000/-. Considering e the appeal on the basis of facts mentio y order and facts submitted by appellant r alongwith Form No. 35.”
el for the assessee gave an un all the documentary evidence he Ld. CIT(A) if the matter is r the case no original return of in re filed in response to section 1
cumstances of the case and in we feel it appropriate to pro assessee to file all necessar its claim. The assessee shall ground before the Ld. CIT(A) d in accordance with law. It School Educational Society
3
6583 to 6591/MUM/2024
number of appellant. It mely manner portal were 16.05.2023,
19.10.2023, no response d on appeal filed by the lly and co- r, which the ars that the eal in any the instant the basis nder.
t's case and the facts of urnish any he appeal in ns made on g the above oned by AO t as note on ndertaking that and shall be restored back to ncome was filed
153A of the Act.
n the interest of ovide one more ry documentary be at liberty to ) which will be is needless to mention that both th afforded adequate op by the assessee are a 4. In the result, a statistical purposes.
Order pronoun (RAHUL CHA
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 08/04/2025
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
////
Chintpurni S
ITA Nos.
he assessee and the Assessing pportunity have been heard. The allowed for statistical purposes.
all the appeals of the assessee ced in the open Court on 08/0
/- AUDHARY)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu
School Educational Society
4
6583 to 6591/MUM/2024
Officer shall be e grounds raised are allowed for 04/2025. d/-
KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai