LOTUS MULTY SPECIALITY HOSPITAL,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 14() PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2259/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 February 2025AY 2018-19Bench: DR.MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding 'reasonable cause'. Given that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC had not decided the appeal on merits, the Tribunal remitted the penalty appeal to the ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication, setting aside the previous findings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19 against a penalty order under Section 270A with a 57-day delay, attributed to a previous tax consultant's failure to communicate notices. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC had dismissed the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, similar to related quantum appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned; Whether the penalty appeal should be remitted to the ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Girish Ladda
For Respondent: Ms. Shilpa N.C
Hearing: 22.01.2025Pronounced: 12.02.2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The captioned appeal pertaining to the Assessment Year 2018-19 at the instance of assessee is directed against the order dated 04.07.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) which inturn is arising out of the Penalty order dated 02.10.2021 passed u/s.270A of the Act.

2.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is delay of 57 days in presenting the appeal before the Tribunal. It was submitted that the notices were sent on email of the previous Tax Consultant Mr. Abhijeet Gaikwad who failed to respond to the notices. Further, the said Tax Consultant has neither informed about the notices/orders. It was therefore unaware of the notices and therefore could not file reply. It is therefore prayed for condoning the delay.

3.

We have carefully gone through the averments made in the condonation petition and find that there was ‘reasonable cause’ which prevented the assessee in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, the delay occurred in preferring the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned by virtue of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 SC .

4.

On merits, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal in and 2258/PUN/2024, dated 16.12.2024 has remitted back the quantum appeals for the A.Yrs. 2016-17 and 2018-19 to the file of ld.CIT(A)/NFAC giving one more opportunity to the assessee as the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has not decided the appeals on merit. In the instant penalty appeal relating to A.Y. 2018-19 also, the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC passed the exparte order dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution. In the backdrop of these facts, ld. Counsel prayed that penalty appeal also may be remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication.

5.

After hearing both the sides and considering the totality of the facts of the case, submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and there being no objection from the side of ld. Departmental Representative, we in the interest of justice deem it proper to give an opportunity to the assessee. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues on merits for the year under appeal are being remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. In such proceedings, ld.CIT(A) shall consider all the submissions of the assessee and pass the order as

per the provision of section 250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to provide proper email id to the department for receiving the hearing notices from the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of the ld.CIT(A) are set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

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

Order pronounced on this 12th day of February, 2025.

More judgments on Section 270A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →