M/S VANSHEE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE-7(1), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal admitted the additional ground of appeal concerning the limitation of the penalty order. Since this issue was not adjudicated by the CIT(Appeals), the matter was restored to the CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(Appeals) concerning penalties under Sections 271D and 271E. The assessee sought to raise an additional ground regarding the limitation of the penalty order.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty order passed under Section 271E was time-barred as per Section 275(1)(c) of the Act. The admissibility and adjudication of additional grounds of appeal not raised before the lower appellate authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES “ C ” BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI A.K. GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
O R D E R PER BENCH : These two appeals filed by the assessee against different orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) passed under Section 271D, 271E and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). Since these appeals have identical
2 & 2552/Bang/2018 issues and interconnected, hence they are clubbed and heard together and common consolidated order is passed. 2. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the ITA No.2552/Bang/2018 and the facts narrated. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that Petition for admission of Additional Grounds of appeal has been filed on limitation of passing of Penalty order which is as under : “
6. Aggrieved with the learned CIT (Appeals) order, the Petitioner is in appeal before your Ld. Authority and wishes to furnish the following additional ground : The impugned order passed under Section 271E of the Act is time barred in accordance with section 275(1)(c) of the Act in accordance with the CBDT Circular in Circular No.10/2016 dated 26.04.2016, thereby rendering it liable to be quashed.”
3. The learned Authorised Representative emphasized that the order is barred by limitation and has to be squashed and the learned Departmental Representative has no serious objection on admitting the additional grounds of Appeal. Accordingly the additional grounds are admitted and heard.
4. We found that this ground of appeal was not raised before the CIT(Appeals) and also goes to the root of the cause, hence we consider it proper to restore the additional grounds of appeal to the file of CIT(Appeals) as no finding was given in his order on this legal issue. Accordingly, we set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) and Restore the entire disputed issues along with additional
3 & 2552/Bang/2018 grounds of appeal to the file of CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate afresh and pass a speaking order and also the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee shall co-operate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal.
5. Similarly, the assessee has filed an appeal ITA No.2552/Bang/2018 above, and the same decision shall apply to this appeal. Accordingly, with the similar direction, we restore disputed issues along with additional gorunds of Appeal to the file of CIT(Appeals) and allow the grounds of appeal of assessee for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, the assessee appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.
More judgments on Section 271D
- Sujatha Vaddanapu, Nalgonda vs ITO, Ward-1, NalgondaITA 2048/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Inder Lal Ramrakhyani, Dhamtari vs ITO, DhamtariITA 694/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Harshit Singhania Buildcon, RaipurITA 560/RPR/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shree Jalaram Finance, Borsad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(4), PetladITA 1785/AHD/2026[2000-01]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Veera Mani Kumari Vattikooti, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward -11(1), HyderabadITA 1218/HYD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026