Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for Assessment Year 2009-10. The penalty was confirmed by the CIT(A) and later the Tribunal set aside the matter to the AO for adjudication. However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as infructuous. The assessee is in further appeal.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) wrongly dismissed the appeal instead of restoring it to the AO as per the earlier directions. The Tribunal admitted the appeal and directed the AO to re-adjudicate the penalty issue.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was correct in dismissing the penalty appeal as infructuous when the Tribunal had directed the matter to be adjudicated by the AO.
Sections Cited
271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 17-03-2025 in the matter of penalty levied by Ld. AO u/s 271(1)(c) for Rs.17,64,606/- vide order dated 24- 03-2014. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. The registry has noted delay of 166 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR.
In the quantum assessment order, Ld. AO rejected the books of the assessee and made various additions. Consequently, impugned penalty was levied by Ld. AO vide order dated 24-03-2014. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty vide order dated 23-02-2018. The matter reached up-to Tribunal vide wherein the appeal was disposed-off vide order dated 16-12-2020. The bench, considering the pendency of review petition of the assessee in quantum appeal before Hon’ble High Court, set aside the matter to Ld. AO to be adjudicated after considering the outcome of assessee’s review petition. Apparently, the appeal has been marked on the ITBA portal for disposal by Ld. CIT(A). The same run contrary to the directions of the Tribunal since the matter was set aside to Ld. AO and not to Ld. CIT(A). Finally, vide order dated 17-03-2025, this appeal has been dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) to be infructuous. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR stated that review petition has been dismissed by Hon’ble High Court vide CM-15801-CII-2019 in / and RA-CR-130-2019 (O&M) on 26-02-2024. A copy of the same has been placed on record.
We find that the issue of penalty was restored back by the Tribunal to the file of Ld. AO and not to the file of Ld. CIT(A). Apparently, the appeal has erroneously been marked on the ITBA portal for disposal by Ld. CIT(A). The same run contrary to the directions of the Tribunal since the matter was set aside to Ld. AO. The Ld. CIT(A), instead of dismissing the appeal, should have restored the penalty issue to the file of Ld. AO pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal. Nevertheless, we admit the appeal and endorse the earlier directions of Tribunal. Accordingly, Ld. AO is directed to re-adjudicate the issue of penalty as directed in the earlier order vide order dated 16-12-2020. No other prayer has been urged before us.
The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 11th March, 2026.