LIONS NAB COMMUNITY EYECARE CENTRE MIRAJ,MIRAJ, SANGLI vs. EXEMPTION WARD-KOLHAPUR, TARABAI PARK, KOLHAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the remaining delay considering the facts and reasons presented. They also decided to adjudicate the issue on merits, finding that the penalty arose due to the assessee having two PAN numbers: one for a firm and another for a trust. The Tribunal deleted the penalty levied under Section 271F.
What were the facts?
The assessee trust failed to file its return of income for AY 2017-18, leading to penalty proceedings under Section 271F. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) against the penalty order, but the appeal was dismissed in limine due to delay. The delay was partly condoned due to the Covid-19 pandemic extension, but some residual delay remained.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 271F for non-filing of return of income is justified when the delay in filing the appeal was partly condoned and the underlying issue relates to confusion between firm and trust PANs?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, AM :
This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 20.05.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18.
Though, the assessee has raised four grounds of appeal but the main grievance in ground No. 1 is that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine on account of delay in filing of the appeal and thus prayed for condonation of delay. So far as the merits of the case is concerned, the same relates to levy of penalty u/s. 271F of the Act at Rs.5,000/- for not filing the income tax return.
The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and supporting the order of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Admittedly, the assessee trust did not file return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 and the for such failure penalty proceedings u/s. 271F of the Act were initiated and finally penalty of Rs.5,000/- imposed on the assessee. The penalty order was passed on 13.01.2022 but the appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) on 13.10.2023. Same part of the delay in filing of the assessee deserves to be condoned on account of limitation period extended by the Hon'ble Apex Court in view of Covid-19 pandemic. However, still some delay is left but considering the facts and reasons mentioned, we find that such delay in filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be condoned.
Now, since in the impugned order the Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt on merits and merely dismissed the appeal in limine ideally the matter needs to be restored to the Ld. CIT(A). However, considering the smallness of the issue, we deem it proper to adjudicate the issue on merits of the case. Coming to the facts that the assessee was having two PAN Number, first one was allotted as AABFL4373L and it clearly indicates that since the 4th letter is “F” the status of the assessee in this PAN Number is firm, but since, the assessee is trust, the relevant form which is meant for filing the return of income for trust cannot be uploaded under the PAN of firm. The assessee duly filed application for cancellation of old PAN and has been issued new PAN as AABTL3432A and the return of income has been filed on this PAN. We find that due to this reason of old PAN under firm status and new PAN under trust status the impugned issue has arisen and the assessee has been wrongly penalized u/s. 271F of the Act. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we delete the impugned penalty levied u/s. 271F of the Act and allow the appeal of the assessee. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced on this 07th day of April, 2025.
More judgments on Section 271F
- Anuragraiji Vallabhraiji Goswai, Surat vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(1), SuratITA 643/SRT/2024[2008-09]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2008-09
- Krunal Bharat Bha vs Ar, Ahmedabadvs.the Income Tax Officer…ITA 332/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Faiz Ala Faizi, Bangalore vs I.T.O., Ward - 54(2), KolkataITA 1374/KOL/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
- Imran Khan, Chandigarh vs The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals…ITA 689/CHANDI/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Imran Khan, Manimajra vs The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals…ITA 688/CHANDI/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026