SANDIP GULAB GOGAWALE,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that as per Section 246 and 246A of the Income Tax Act, appeals against penalty orders passed by the Assessing Officer should be filed before the JCIT(A)/CIT(A) and not the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal filed before the Tribunal was not maintainable.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order directly before the ITAT, instead of first appealing to the CIT(A). The assessee appeared in person and admitted to the mistake due to ignorance and inadvertent error.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal against a penalty order passed by the AO is maintainable before the ITAT if not filed before the CIT(A) first.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sandip Gulab Gogawale, Vs. ITO, Ward-5(3), Pune. 143, A/p- Gogalwadi, Taluka- Haveli, District- Pune- 412205. PAN : ALLPG3405D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sandip Gogawale Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 09.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.09.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03.01.2025 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act by the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2011-12.
When the appeal was called for hearing, the assessee himself appeared in person and submitted that due to ignorance and Tribunal instead of filing the first appeal before Ld. CIT(A). In this regard, the assessee also filed an application and requested before the Bench to pass appropriate order. He submitted that he will file the appeal before the CIT(A) as per law.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. Considering the application filed by the assessee on 09.09.2025, we find that admittedly the assessee was required to file first appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. However, due to ignorance the assessee inadvertently filed the instant appeal before this Tribunal. As per section 246 and 246A of the Income Tax Act, appeal against the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer lies before JCIT(A)/CIT(A) and not before this Tribunal. Therefore, the instant appeal directly filed before this Tribunal is not maintainable and accordingly the present appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026