PAWAN CASTINGS MEGHALAYA PRIVATE LIMITED,MEGHALAYA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2/GTY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 March 2026AY 2010-11Bench: SHRIDUVVURU RL REDDY (Vice President), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the penalty appeal to the file of the CIT(A) to be decided along with the quantum appeal. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The quantum appeal had already been restored to the file of the CIT(A) by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be restored to the file of the CIT(A) along with the quantum appeal that was already restored.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Gupta, AR
For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, DR
Hearing: 13.03.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 14.11.2025 for the AY 2010-11.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the quantum appeal has already been set aside to the file of the ld. CIT (A). Therefore, this penalty appeal may also be restored to the file of the ld. CIT (A) so that the same could be decided along with quantum appeal.

3.

The ld. DR did not oppose the argument of the ld. AR.

4.1. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →