MR MANOJ N PERE,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 744/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: DR.MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

Given that the basis for initiating penalties (the quantum assessment) was already set aside for fresh adjudication, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to also remit the penalty issues to the learned Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. Consequently, the impugned penalty orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against NFAC orders confirming penalties under Sections 271F, 271AA, and 272A for AY 2017-18. The Tribunal had previously, in a separate order, restored the underlying quantum assessment (framed under Sections 147 read with 144) for the same AY to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty orders should be sustained when the foundational quantum assessment, which led to the penalties, has been set aside and remanded for de novo adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271F,Section 271AA,Section 272A,Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Darekar
For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Hearing: 23.09.2025Pronounced: 24.09.2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The captioned three appeals at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 are against the separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) confirming the penalties levied u/s.271F, 271AA and 272A of the Act.

2.

At the outset, ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the quantum issue for A.Y. 2017-18 relating to additions made in the assessment orders dated 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act dated 17.03.2022 passed in the case of assessee has already been restored back by this Tribunal to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication, therefore, the issues relating to the impugned penalties also deserve to be restored to the file of ld. JAO for necessary re- adjudication. Copy of order by this Tribunal in dated 13.08.2025 is placed on record.

3.

On the other hand, ld. DR was fair enough in not opposing the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

4.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessee is an individual and various additions made in the hands of the assessee in the assessment order for A.Y. 2017-18 framed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act on 17.03.2022. Assessee failed to succeed before ld.CIT(A) and thereafter approached before this Tribunal and vide order dated 13.08.2025 in this Tribunal restored the issues raised on merit to the file of ld. JAO for carrying out denovo proceedings.

5.

Under these given facts and circumstances, where the assessment proceedings in which ld. AO recorded the satisfaction for initiating impugned penalties for the A.Y. 2017-18 stands restored to the file of ld. JAO for afresh adjudication, we deem it appropriate to remit the issues raised in the instant appeals as well to the file of ld. JAO for denovo adjudication. Impugned orders are set aside and the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause.

6.

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 24th day of September, 2025.

More judgments on Section 271F

All 927 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →