SHRI PRAKASH VILAS RASAL,SANGLI vs. ITO, WARD 5, SANGLI, SANGLI

PDF

ITA 83/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 April 2025AY 2015-16Bench: us. Instant four appeals under appeal are against the levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We find that the quantum issue was also challenged by the assessee and vide order dated 21.03.2025 this Tribunal has restored the issue of quantum additions to the file of ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. Since quantum additions have already been restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) and the levy of penalty is dependent upon the additions made in the hands of assessee, the instant four a3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee filed appeals against penalty orders passed by the ld. CIT(A) under Section 271(1)(c) for various assessment years. The underlying issue of quantum additions, which forms the basis for these penalties, had already been restored to the ld. CIT(A) by the Tribunal for de novo adjudication in a previous order.

Held

The Tribunal held that since the quantum additions have been remitted to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, the penalty orders, being dependent on these additions, must also be restored to the ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass a speaking order after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Key Issues

Whether penalties levied under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying quantum additions have been restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

Sections Cited

271(1)(c), 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Smt. Vinita Shah (Virtual)

For Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk

Hearing: 29.04.2025Pronounced: 30.04.2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER BENCH:

The above bunch of appeals at the instance of assessee are against the orders of ld.CIT(A) evenly dated 19.11 2024 affirming the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act pertaining to assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 and 2015-16 respectively.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned orders of penalty deserve to be set aside and restored back to the file of ld.CIT(A) as the issue of quantum additions have already been restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) by this Tribunal in 79, 82 and 84/PUN/2025 order dated 21.03.2025. Ld. Departmental Representative failed to controvert this contention.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Instant four appeals under appeal are against the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. We find that the quantum issue was also challenged by the assessee and vide order dated 21.03.2025 this Tribunal has restored the issue of quantum additions to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Since quantum additions have already been restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) and the levy of penalty is dependent upon the additions made in the hands of assessee, the instant four appeals are also restored back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and for passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the instant batch of appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.