NIRMAL TRADERS,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC - TDS, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 448/PUN/2021Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 September 20223 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty was imposed without giving the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing, as the notice was allegedly sent to the erstwhile Chartered Accountant's address and not served on the assessee. The matter was restored to the AO for a fresh penalty order after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 142(1) which was not complied with by the assessee. Consequently, a penalty of Rs. 10,000 was imposed under section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance and failure to attend proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 272A was rightly imposed without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(1)(d),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S.SYAL & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Ramesh P. Murkunde
Hearing: 20.09.2022Pronounced: 20.09.2022

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL, VP: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on 27-08-2021 confirming the penalty of Rs.10,000/- imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.272A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’).

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the AO issued notice u/s.142(1) on 12-07-2019 which was served upon the assessee but remained uncomplied with. On being show caused as to why penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) be not imposed, the assessee neither attended the proceedings nor filed any reply. This led to the imposition of penalty of Rs.10,000/-, which came to be affirmed in the first appeal.

3.

We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee. As such, we are going to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on merits. It is seen that the assessee did not attend the proceedings before the AO. It was stated before the ld. CIT(A) that the notice, leading to the imposition of penalty, was sent at the address of the erstwhile Chartered Accountant and was never served on the assessee. In view of the above factual scenario, it is clear that the penalty has been imposed without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of AO. We order accordingly and direct him to pass the penalty order afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20th day of September, 2022.

More judgments on Section 272A(1)(d)

All 1,125 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(1)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →