Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual, did not file her return of income for AY 2018-19. The case was reopened, and assessment was completed determining total income at Rs.31,31,51,116/-. Penalty proceedings u/s 270A were also initiated.
Held
The Tribunal held that since a coordinate bench had already set aside the quantum assessment order and remanded it back to the AO, the penalty order should also be set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication after the quantum assessment is decided.
Key Issues
Whether the penalty order u/s 270A survives when the underlying quantum assessment order has been set aside and remanded. Whether the appeal against the penalty order should be adjudicated on merits or remanded.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 142(1), 144, 144B, 270A, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2018-19 Aruna Singh, Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kalyan. C/1902, Casa Bella Gold, Palava City, Kalyan Shildesai, Shanti Nagar, Nijie, Thane- 421204. PAN : BFKPS6115N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sharad A. Vaze & Shri Amod S. Vaze Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date of hearing : 14.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.08.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.01.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
1. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (A) – NFAC Delhi, is 137 days in filing the appeal, for the reasons beyond her control. The appeal before CIT(A) be restored by setting aside his order dt. 27/01/2025.
Without prejudice to Ground No.1 above, in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, since the assessment dt. 19/12/2023 is set aside by Pune ITAT in the said assessment does not survive and as a consequence penalty levied on such set aside assessment also does not survive hence the penalty needs to be cancelled.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any of the grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed her return of income for the year under consideration. On the basis of information received from insight portal that the assessee has purchased an immovable property for Rs.2,25,73,600/- and also entered in the transactions of sale and purchase of equity shares and options trading in recognized stock exchange, however, return of income has not been furnished by the assessee, therefore the case was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act. After passing order u/s 148A(d) of the IT Act, statutory notices u/s 148 and 142(1) of the IT Act were respectively issued to the assessee and the assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining total income at Rs.31,31,51,116/-. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty 270A of the IT Act and vide order dated 25.04.2024 an order imposing penalty of Rs.20,62,46,928/- u/s 270A of the IT Act was passed by the Assessing Officer.
Against the above penalty order passed u/s 270A of the IT Act, the assessee preferred first appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the appeal was filed belatedly i.e. with a delay of 137 days, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without condoning the above delay of 137 days and also without adjudicating the grounds of appeal
raised by the assessee.
5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
6. Ld. AR appearing from side of the assessee submitted before us that the assessee has also preferred an appeal against the quantum assessment order for the same assessment year on the basis of which the above penalty u/s 270A of the IT Act was imposed. Ld. AR further submitted that the appeal against quantum assessment order was also dismissed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and a coordinate bench of this Tribunal in vide order dated 11.04.2025 has already set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remanded the matter of quantum assessment Ld. Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication as per fact & Law. Therefore Ld. AR prayed to set-aside the impugned penalty order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC & further requested to remand the issue of penalty u/s 270A of the IT Act to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer to decide the issue of penalty after deciding the quantum case for the same assessment year.
Ld. DR appearing from side of the Revenue did not raise any objection to the request of the counsel of the assessee for remanding the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the decision passed by coordinate bench of this Tribunal in quantum case (supra) for the same assessment year of the assessee, wherein the Tribunal has already, set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remanded the quantum case to the file of the Assessing Officer by observing as under :- “8. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case enumerated above and there being no objection from the Ld. DR for remanding the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication on merits, we deem it fit in the interest of justice and fair play to give an opportunity to the assessee to present her case and Ld. AO. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues on merits for the relevant AY 2018-19 under consideration are hereby restored to the file of the Ld. AO with a direction to decide the same afresh as per fact and law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to provide proper email id to the Department for receiving the notice(s) of hearing from the ITBA portal and remain vigilant and not to take adjournment on the appointed date unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the Ld. AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Needless to say, the assessee shall provide the requisite support in terms of submitting the relevant documents/evidence as may be required/called upon during the fresh proceedings before the Ld. AO. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. AO for de- novo adjudication on merits. We direct and order accordingly.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.”
9. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and having regard to the decision rendered by the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the quantum proceedings for the same assessment year in the assessee’s own case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the impugned penalty order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC & remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration of the issue relating to the imposition of penalty u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, upon disposal of the quantum case for the relevant assessment year. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed.