KIRTIKUMAR HARIBHAI PATEL,NAGPUR vs. ITO 4(3), NAGPUR
Facts
The assessee appealed against an order of the CIT(A) confirming a penalty of Rs.11,79,772/- under Section 270A for the assessment year 2020-21. The assessee argued that they could not properly represent their case due to circumstances beyond their control and challenged the validity of the penalty.
Held
The ITAT observed that the assessment proceedings underlying the penalty had previously been set aside and remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the tribunal also restored the penalty proceedings to the CIT(A) for a de novo decision, to be made only after the assessment appeal is finalized. A cost of ₹ 5,000 was imposed on the assessee for non-compliance and procedural delays.
Key Issues
Whether the penalty confirmed by the CIT(A) was justified when the underlying assessment proceedings were set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication, and whether the assessee was provided adequate opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
ITA no.328/Nag./2025 (Assessment Year : 2020–21) Kirtikumar Haribhai Patel 640, Chikkhali Layout ……………. Appellant Kalamna, Nagpur 440 008 PAN – AQBPP2096E v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(3), Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Hitesh P. Shah Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Date of Hearing – 23/06/2025 Date of Order – 22/09/2025
O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M.
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 25/03/2025, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2020–21.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:–
“The Ld. A.O. and the Hon. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the Appellant could not properly represent his case due to circumstances beyond his control.
2 Kirtikumar Haribhai Patel ITA no.328/Nag./2025
The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming Penalty of Rs.11,79,772/- U/S. 270A levied by the Ld. A.O. without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.”
During the course of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (for short "the A.R.") submitted that the assessment proceedings have been set aside in ITA no.44/Nag./2025, vide order dated 14/05/2025, by holding as follows:–
“3. I have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am of the opinion that in the interest of justice and following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity is hereby granted to the assessee to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A). 4. Keeping in view the assessee’s pattern of non-compliance and procedural delays, I deem it fit and appropriate to impose a cost on the assessee of ` 5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand Only) payable to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority and produce evidence of payment before the learned CIT(A). This cost underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and timely compliance during assessment and appellate proceedings. 5. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) for the assessment year under consideration is hereby set aside and restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, subject to the condition that the assessee produces evidence of making payment of cost as indicated above. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. 6. In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.”
Since the assessment proceedings have been restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, consequently, penalty
3 Kirtikumar Haribhai Patel ITA no.328/Nag./2025
proceedings are also accordingly restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh. He is directed to decide upon the imposition of penalty only after the appeal against the assessment proceedings is finalized keeping all legal issues wide open for adjudication.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/09/2025
Sd/- Sd/- N.K. CHOUDHRY K.M. ROY JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 22/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur
