MALATAJ CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY. LTD.,ANAND vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), PETLAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 261/AHD/2021Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2022AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the matter back to the AO for a fresh decision, subject to a penalty of Rs. 1000 on the assessee for wasting the revenue's time. The AO is to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a) which was disallowed by the AO, leading to a penalty. The AO passed the penalty order without considering the assessee's submission, and the assessee also failed to file submissions before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was rightly confirmed when the AO did not consider the assessee's submission and the assessee also failed to file submissions before the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 271(1)(c),Section 274

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N. Shah, A.R, Shri Mod. Usman, CIT.D.R. &, Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr. D.R

ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JM:

The appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) vide Appeal No. CIT(A), Vadodara- 1/10413/2018-19 dated 15.09.2021 arising in the penalty order dated 12.02.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY. 2015-16.

Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2015-16 - 2 - 2. The ground of appeal raised by assessee reads as under:

“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts of the case by confirming penalty of Rs.2,00,450/- levied by the learned Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2,00,450/- 2. Your Appellant, therefore, prays to delete the penalty of Rs.2,00,450/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the learned Assessing Officer. ------ 3. Your Appellant prays to reserve the right to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal. Total Tax Effect 2,00,450/-“

3. The brief facts of the case are that return of income declaring taxable income at Rs.Nil filed on 08.02.2016 after claiming deduction 80P(2)(a) of the Act of Rs.15,84,525/-. After verification, AO disallowed the claim to the extent of Rs.6,58,707/- and made addition on which penalty imposed.

4.

The concealment notice of Section 274 of the Act was issued on 16.01.2019. The explanation letter dated 29.01.2019 was prepared for submission. Thereafter, the AO was on leave and the Clerk not accepted the submission upon telephone talk. Without considering the submission, AO passed the order.

5.

Thereafter, assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the learned CIT(A). Before learned CIT(A), it was contended by the assessee that matter was decided ex parte by the learned AO and even before the learned CIT(A), assessee could not file his submission. Therefore, in such facts and circumstances, we set aside this matter back to the file of the learned AO subject to the condition that a penalty of Rs.1000/- shall be imposed on the assessee as it has wasted precious time of the Revenue Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2015-16 - 3 - authority and did not file any relevant details in support of its case and same to be deposited with the department within 60 days from the receipt of this order. Thereafter, the AO shall decide the matter after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass the order as per law.

6.

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

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 23/05/2022

Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 23/05/2022 True Copy S.K.SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →