Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee declared income of Rs. 16,37,900/- and agricultural income of Rs. 30,00,000/-. The AO added Rs. 30,00,000/- for unexplained income, and subsequently levied penalty under Section 271AAC(1). The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte. The Tribunal had previously restored the quantum addition issue to the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal held that the ex-parte order by CIT(A) was not justified as the assessee had filed submissions. Consequently, the order of CIT(A) was set aside, and the issue of penalty under Section 271AAC(1) was also restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by CIT(A) without considering assessee's submissions is justified, and whether the penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) needs to be readjudicated.
Sections Cited
271AAC(1), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER
PER MANISH BORAD, AM:
This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 29.07.2024 which is arising out of the assessment order for Assessment Year 2020-21 framed on 23.09.2022 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, Ld. Departmental Representative fairly submitted that the instant appeal is against the levy of penalty u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act but the quantum appeal already stands restored by this Hon’ble Tribunal to Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC by a order dated 19.11.2024 vide for Assessment Year 2020-21. He therefore requested that the present appeal also deserves to be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Considering this fact, we decide to adjudicate this appeal ex-parte qua the assessee with the able assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative and available records.
We have heard Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and income of Rs.16,37,900/- and agricultural income of Rs.30,00,000/- declared in the return of income for Assessment Year 2020-21. During the course of scrutiny proceedings, the assessee could not substantiate the claim of exempt income of Rs.30,00,000/- and the same was added in the hands of the assessee. Thereafter, penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC(1) were carried out and penalty of Rs.2,31,750/- levied at the rate of 10% of the tax on unexplained income of Rs.30,00,000/-. We further notice that when the assessee failed to succeed on the quantum addition before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, he thereafter preferred appeal before this Tribunal and vide order dated 19.11.2024 (supra), this Tribunal restored the issue of quantum addition to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication observing as under :- “7. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the copy of e-submission online furnished by the assessee on 20.07.2024 before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. We find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has decided the appeal under impression that the appellant-assessee has not complied with hearing notice and has not furnished any evidence/written submission in support of grounds of appeal
. Whereas in-fact the appellant-assessee has filed written submission documents/evidences on 20.07.2024 and the copy of e-acknowledgement of the same is also filed before the Bench. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC without considering the online written submission furnished by the appellant-assessee is not justified. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law and considering the reply already furnished by the assessee after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.”
4. Since the quantum addition on which the impugned penalty has been levied already stands restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the issue challenging the