BIRAJA REALCON PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, BBSR, BHUBANESWAR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) concerning a penalty levied under section 271(1)(d) of the Act. The assessee did not appear for hearings, and an adjournment petition was rejected. The CIT(A) had issued multiple notices without a response, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not heard on merits by the CIT(A). Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication to provide the assessee an opportunity to be heard, subject to a cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
Key Issues
Whether the penalty under section 271(1)(d) was levied correctly, and if the assessee was provided adequate opportunity of being heard by the lower authorities.
Sections Cited
271(1)(d)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
Per Bench :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 25.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A), Bhubaneswar- 1/10383/2018-19 for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. None appeared for the assessee An adjournment petition dated 2nd December, 2025 is on record to adjourn the appeal on the ground that the AR of the assessee is out of station and not able to attend the hearing. One staff of the ld AR attended the Court. However, considering the facts in the present
2 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.576/CTK/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)
case, adjournment petition is rejected and matter is disposed of after hearing Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that the ld CIT(A) has issued eight notices to the assessee to represent the case but there was no response to the notices. The issue in this appeal is against the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(d) of the Act. As there was no representation, the ld CIT(A) had no option but to dismiss the appeal of the assessee thereby confirming the penalty levied by the ld AO. The ld CIT(A) has also not discussed the issue on merits. However, as the assessee has not been heard, in order to give one more opportunity, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to ITAT Bar Association, Cuttack and receipt of the same be produced before the ld CIT(A). The assessee is directed to cooperate in the set side proceedings and substantiate its claim with documentary evidence.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 5/12/2025. (राजेश कुमार) (जाज" माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सद"य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER "दनांक Dated 5/12/2025 B.K.Parida, Sr.P.S(OS)
3 आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.576/CTK/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)
आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant- Biraja Realcon Private Limited, Plot No.29, Basundhara Colony, Naharkanta, Hansapal, Bhubaneswar.
""यथ" / The Respondent- JCIT, Range-1, Bhubaneswar. 3. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. आयकर आयु"त / CIT
"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. स"या"पत ""त //// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
(
