THE THANJAVUR PUBLIC SERVANTS CO-OP BANKLTD,THANJAVUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER CIRCLE 2(1) TRICHY, TRICHY

The Thanjavur Public Servants Coop Income Tax Officer, Bank Limited, Circle-2(1), No.1149, South Main Street, Trichy. Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu – 613 009. [PAN: AAAF52496D] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.Alagappan, C.A(Virtual), प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2025-26 / 1075788861(1) dated 24.04.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2019-20. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time.

2.0 The only issue contested by the assessee through its grounds of appeal are regarding imposition of penalty u/s 271AAC(i) by the Ld.AO and its confirmation by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.Counsel for the assessee has argued that the decision of Ld.CIT(A) is totally erroneous while confirming imposition of penalty u/s 271AAC(i) on the premise that the assessee has not contested the quantum addition. It was submitted that the assessee had indeed contested the quantum addition and that the assessment order dated 22.03.2024 was set aside by the Ld.CIT(A) vide his order dated 13.06.2025 (DIN No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1077009461(1)) to the Ld.AO for readjudication de novo. It was accordingly argued that the issue of penalty u/s 271AAC (1) in the present appeal be set aside to the Ld.AO for reconsideration. 3.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. As per brief factual matrix of the case an ex-parte order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 was passed by the Ld.AO on 22.03.2024 making additions of Rs.2.71 Crores u/s 69A on account of unexplained money, Rs.3.49 Crores app. u/s 69 on account of unexplained investments and Rs.2,70,000/- on account of unaccounted rental receipts in the case of the assessee. The controversy primarily involved availability of two separate PAN numbers in assessee’s hands and non-disclosure of correct and complete income qua such different PAN numbers. Page - 2 - of 4. Subsequently the Ld.AO levied penalty u/s 271AAC (1) vide his order dated 09.09.2024. The assessee preferred appeal against both quantum addition made vide order dated 22.03.2024 as well as penalty vide order dated 09.09.2024. The Ld.CIT(A), NFAC passed his order dated 13.06.2025 vide DIN No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077009461(1) setting the assessment back to the file of the Ld.AO as evident from para 5 on page 24 / 25 of his impugned order. The Ld.CIT(A), NFAC passed another order dated 24.04.2025 vide DIN No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1075788861(1) confirming the penalty u/s 271AAC (1) vide his order dated 09.09.2024 on the premise that assessee has not contested the quantum addition. This fact has been recorded by him in para 5.5 on page 9 of his order dated 24.04.2025 supra. 5.0 We are of the considered view that there appears to be some mix up in the decision taken by the Ld.CIT(A). Apparently, in the faceless appellate regime of the Income Tax Department, the two CIT(A) were different persons and possibly remotely located. It appears that because of some technical problem the CIT(A) passing order dated 24.04.2025 was not aware of the pendency of assessee’s appeal against quantum addition and for which another CIT(A) passed his order dated 13.06.2025. Thus, the undisputed fact available on record is that the quantum addition in the case stands set aside to the file of the Ld.AO for assessment de novo. Be that as it may be it is trite law that when the Page - 3 - of 4 quantum addition is not in existence no corresponding concealment penalty can survive. Accordingly, we set aside the order of lower authorities and restore the matter of imposition of penalty back to the file of the Ld.AO. He will be at liberty to decide the issue of imposition of penalty post conclusion of passing of fresh assessment order in assessee’s case and in accordance with law. The assessee shall be entitled to be accorded an opportunity of being heard before passing of any adverse order in its case. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 8th , Aug-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वर्की) (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (ABY T VARKEY) (AMITABH SHUKLA) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 8th , Aug-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF

Page - 4 - of 4