KANDASAMY RAMESHKUMAR,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), SALEM

The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.

At the outset, the Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that the penalty of Rs. 2,94,923/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without providing the proper opportunity to the assessee, and therefore, it is requested that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A).

On the other hand, the ld.CIT-DR stated that the Ld.CIT(A)- NFAC has given enough opportunities before passing the order on 18.09.2024 and hence, the order of Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC may please be confirmed.

We have heard both the parties and carefully examined the orders of the lower authorities. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty of Rs.2,94,923/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, imposed by the A.O due to the non-compliance of the assessee. The Ld. A.R. has submitted that the 3 -: Ld. CIT(A) passed the order without participation of the assessee. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice, we remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a denovo adjudication. We also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and to be diligent in submitting the relevant details for the adjudication of the case as and when called for. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.