Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a cooperative housing society, had a deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) disallowed in the assessment order. A penalty u/s 270A was subsequently imposed. The assessee appealed both orders. However, the appeal against the penalty order was decided before the appeal against the quantum assessment order.
Held
The Tribunal held that it was appropriate to set aside the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to decide the appeal afresh after the disposal of the quantum assessment appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in deciding the penalty appeal when the quantum assessment appeal, which had a bearing on the penalty, was still pending.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144B, 80P(2)(d), 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2021-22 Nyati Meadows Sahakari Vs. ITO, Ward-7(3), Pune. Gruhrachana Sanstha Maryadit, S.No.9/2 + 10/1, 10/2, 10/3 and 10/5, Near St. Arnolds Central School, Wadgaon Sheri, Pune- 411014. PAN : AABAN3940N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Dr. Prashant Munot Revenue by : Shri Uodol Raj Singh Date of hearing : 12.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.11.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.03.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2021-22.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessee is a cooperative housing society and vide order dated 15.12.2022 assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act was passed wherein deduction of Rs.43,14,767/- claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the IT Act was Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC against the above quantum assessment order. Subsequently, vide order dated 03.03.2023 penalty of Rs.6,73,104/- was imposed u/s 270A of the IT Act on the basis of above quantum assessment order. The assessee cooperative society also preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC against the above penalty order.
After considering the reply of the assessee vide order dated 29.03.2025 Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and confirmed the penalty of Rs.6,73,104/- imposed u/s 270A of the IT Act.
It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before us that the appeal against the quantum assessment order for the concerned assessment year is still pending for adjudication before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, however the appeal against the consequential penalty imposed u/s 270A of the IT Act has been decided /confirmed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Ld. AR submitted before us that the fact of pendency of appeal against the relevant quantum assessment order was brought in the knowledge of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC through a written submission which was reproduced by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in his order wherein Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC was requested to keep the appeal pending against the penalty order till the disposal of appeal filed against the quantum assessment order for the relevant assessment year. However, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC without accepting the written request made by the assessee cooperative society proceeded to decide the penalty appeal prior to disposal of appeal against the quantum assessment order which has a substantial bearing on the penalty order. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before us to pass appropriate order in this regard.
Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities, however did not raise any objection if the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the issue afresh after disposal of the appeal filed against the relevant quantum assessment order.
We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that penalty of Rs.6,73,104/- 270A of the IT Act on the basis of addition made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the IT Act in quantum assessment order. The assessee preferred appeals against the quantum assessment as well as against the penalty order, however the appeal against penalty order was listed for hearing prior to listing of appeal against the quantum assessment order. Therefore, the assessee requested before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to keep the penalty appeal pending till the disposal of appeal against the quantum assessment order. However, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC without accepting the request of the assessee dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and confirmed the imposition of penalty u/s 270A of the IT Act.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to his file to decide the appeal afresh after disposal of appeal against the quantum assessment order for the relevant assessment year. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.