PATODIA FORGINGS GEARS LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-8 , PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2745/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 May 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI R.K. PANDA (Vice President), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the coordinate bench had already set aside the quantum assessment for the same assessment year. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order confirming a penalty of Rs. 8,82,096 levied under section 270A for AY 2018-19. The assessee contended that the penalty was unlawful and bad in law.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty order under section 270A can be sustained when the quantum assessment has been set aside by the Tribunal for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh Khandelwal
For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai-Addl.CIT(DR)

आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :

1.

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.10.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)/NFAC, [“CIT(A)”] whereby he confirmed the penalty of Rs. 8,82,096/- levied by the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) pertaining to Assessment Year (“AY”) 2018-19.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-

1. On the facts & circumstances prevailing in the case & as per the provisions of the Act, the imposition of penalty u/s 270A amounting to Rs. 8,82,096/- against the assessee is unlawful, not tenable in law and without following the rules of natural justice. It be held that penalty so imposed is bad in law and it should be deleted. Just and proper relief be granted

2. The appellant prays to be allowed to add, amend, modify, rectify, delete and raise any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. “

3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the coordinate Bench of Pune Tribunal has set aside the quantum assessment in the assessee’s case for A.Y. 2018-19 to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the matter afresh on merits of the case. He, therefore, requested the Bench that the impugned penalty order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC may also be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication afresh on merits of the case in light of the outcome of the quantum appeal of the assessee.

4.

The Ld. DR had no objection to the above proposition of the Ld. AR.

5.

We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on records. We have also perused the order of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the quantum appeal of the assessee in the case of Patodia Forgings and Gears Ltd. vs. ACIT , for A.Y. 2018-19 dated 22/05/2024 and find that the Tribunal has set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for A.Y. 2018-19 on quantum with a direction to Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the issues afresh by passing a speaking order on merits of the case. In this view of the matter, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned penalty order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to his file for decision afresh on merits in accordance with law taking into account the outcome of the assessee’s appeal on quantum after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties. We order accordingly.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th May, 2025.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →