GAJAMFAR ALI,ROHRU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD RAMPUR, RAMPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeals concerning penalties under Section 271(1)(c) and Section 271A should be adjudicated on merits, as they are directly related to the quantum appeal pending before the CIT(A). For the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) due to non-compliance with notices, a part was confirmed, and a part was deleted.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed three appeals against the confirmation of penalties levied by the AO under various sections, including Section 271(1)(b), Section 271A, and Section 271(1)(c). The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals due to a delay of 139 days without condonation.
What were the issues?
Whether penalties levied under Section 271(1)(b), 271A, and 271(1)(c) are to be adjudicated on merits despite the delay, and whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) is justified for non-compliance with notices.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 271(1)(b),Section 271A,Section 271(1)(c),Section 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
(िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Gajanfar Ali ITO Ward Rampur बनाम/ C/o Usha Niwas, Near Police Station Shimla (HP) -172001 Vs. Rohru, Shimla (HP) - 171207 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. APLPA-2865-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Praveen Sharma (Advocate) (Virtual)- Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 02-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 02-12-2025 : आदेश / O R D E R
Aforesaid three appeals by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 assails confirmation of penalties as levied by Ld. AO u/s 271(1)(b) for Rs.60,000/-, penalty of Rs.25,000/- u/s 271A and penalty of Rs.5,01,260/- u/s 271(1)(c). The impugned orders of Ld. CIT(A) have dismissed the appeals in limine for want of condonation of delay of 139 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
The Ld. AR, drawing attention to assessee’s background, pleaded for adjudication of appeal on merits. It has been stated that quantum appeal is already pending for adjudication before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeals.
Considering the fact that the quantum appeal would have direct bearing on impugned penalties as levied by Ld. AO u/s 271(1)(c) & u/s 271A, these penalties are to be adjudicated on merits in the light of quantum appeal. Therefore, the appeals qua these two penalties stand restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of merits with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The issue of delay would not be raised by Ld. CIT(A).
& 1248/Chandi/2025 stand allowed for statistical purposes. 4. So far as the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) is concerned, I find that the identical penalty of Rs.10,000/- each has been levied for 6 defaults since the assessee failed to comply with hearing notices u/s 142(1) on six occasions. Since the default is recurring in nature, I confirm penalty of Rs.10,000/- for first default and delete the remaining penalty of Rs.50,000/-.
Order pronounced on 02nd December, 2025.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(b)
- Navanitbhai Gordhanbhai Bhuva, Surat vs ITO, Ward 3(3)(1), SuratITA 1195/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Navanitbhai Gordhanbhai Bhuva, Surat vs ITO, Ward 3(3)(1), SuratITA 1194/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Navanitbhai Gordhanbhai Bhuva, Surat vs ITO, Ward 3(3)(1), SuratITA 1193/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Laxmi Narain Kesarwani, Delhi vs DCIT, Central Circle-20, New DelhiITA 4432/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Laxminarain Kesarwani, Delhi vs DCIT, Central Circel-20, New DelhiITA 4431/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026