DEVENDRA KUMAR GARG,BAGHPAT vs. ITO, BARAUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5692/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 March 2020AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the quantum appeal was restored to the AO for a fresh decision, the penalty appeal should also be restored to the AO for a fresh adjudication. The assessee should be given an adequate opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's quantum appeal for AY 2009-10 was restored to the AO by the ITAT for a fresh decision after granting an opportunity to substantiate the case. The present appeal concerns a penalty levied on the same assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication in light of the quantum appeal being restored. The assessee's right to a fair hearing for substantiating their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU

ORDER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the impugned order dated 08.03.2017 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Aligarh pertaining assessment year 2009-10 on the following grounds:-

“1. That the Ld. Appeal Authority was not justified to decided the appeal according to ground of appeal as mentioned in page no. 2 of appeal order.

2. That Ld. Appeal Authority was not justified to confirm penalty on account of Rs. 9,60,000/- amount depositing in bank as concealed income.

3. That Ld. Appeal Authority was not justified to confirm the party penalty u/s. 271(1)©.

2.

Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.

3.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that ITAT, ‘SMC’ Bench, New Delhi vide its order dated 30.09.2019 in (AY 2009-10) in assessee’s quantum appeal has restored the issue to the file of the AO with the direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law, by allowing the grounds raised by the assessee for statistical purposes. For the sake of convenience, he filed the copy of the aforesaid Tribunal’s order dated 30.09.2019. Therefore, he requested that since the issue in the quantum appeal has been restored to the AO, similarly the issue involved in the present penalty appeal may also be restored to the file of the AO with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate his case, in accordance with law.

4.

On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

5.

I have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the authorities below. I find that ITAT, ‘SMC’ Bench, New Delhi vide its order dated 30.09.2019 in (AY 2009-10) in assessee’s quantum appeal has restored the issue to the file of the AO with the direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law and by allowing the grounds raised by the assessee for statistical purposes. Since the issued involved in the quantum appeal has been restored to the AO for deciding the same afresh and therefore, similarly the issue involved in the present penalty appeal needs to be restored to the file of the AO with the directions to decide the issues involved therein afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate his case. I hold and directly accordingly.

6.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes .

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →