PALLAVI SOOD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on 2.9.2016 confirming the penalty of Rs.27,73,216/- imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in relation to the assessment year 2010-11.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. It is observed that the Assessing Officer completed assessment under section 143(3) at a total income of Rs. 3.10 crore and odd as against the returned income of Rs.2.38 lac. The assessee moved revision petition under section 264 of the Act which was not admitted by the Pr. CIT, vide his order dated 23.3.2015. The assessee preferred an appeal against such order before the Tribunal. The same got dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 16.5.2018 (ITA No. 2269/Del/2015) holding that no appeal lies before the Tribunal against an order under section 264 of the Act. In the meantime, the assessee approached the Hon'ble High Court against the rejection of revision petition under section 264. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide its order dated 13.7.2018 noted the unfortunate events indicating the assessee’s right to appeal being foreclosed. That is how, the Hon'ble High Court allowed the assessee to file appeal before the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) with a direction to the first appellate authority to adjudicate it 2 on merits without being influenced by the limitation. The assessee has now preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) which is pending adjudication. Crux of the matter is that the assessee’s appeal against the original assessment order is still pending before the learned CIT(A) for adjudication. In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order confirming penalty of Rs. 27.73 lac is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. We order accordingly and direct the AO to decide the question of penalty after the disposal of the appeal by the learned CIT(A) in quantum proceedings.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.