BALASAHEB ARJUN MALAWADE,SOLAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3) , SOLAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1607/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 January 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 set aside the order of the CIT(A) and directed him to condone the delay and decide the appeal afresh on merits after providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the penalty order confirmed by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution and had not condoned the delay in filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without condoning the delay and deciding the matter on merits. Whether the penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) is sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

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

For Appellant: Shri Chandan Katariya
For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

आदेश / ORDER

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :

1.

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.07.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] whereby he confirmed the penalty of Rs.8,85,574/- levied by the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) u/s 271AAC(1)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) on agricultural income of Rs.1,14,63,399/- pertaining to Assessment Year (“AY”) 2018-19.

2.

Perusal of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT (A) reveals that he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution of the appeal. Whilst the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on merits of the case for non- prosecution, at the same time, he has not condoned the delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee before him.

3.

Vide our order of even date we have set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on quantum with a direction to Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before him and to decide the issues involved afresh on merits. We, therefore, set aside the impugned penalty order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for decision afresh in accordance with law after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties. We order accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st January, 2025.

More judgments on Section 271AAC(1)

All 1,211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAC(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →