KHUSHI RAM DANSENA, RAIGARH,RAIGARH vs. ITO, WARD-3, RAIGARH, RAIGARH
Facts
The assessee appealed against an order from the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for AY 2011-12. The assessee had opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme for penalty proceedings, for which Form 5 was obtained. Simultaneously, a quantum appeal was filed before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, which was mistakenly dismissed on the ground that Form 5 applied to the quantum matter, leading to non-adjudication of the quantum appeal.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, remanding the quantum appeal for a de novo adjudication as per law and natural justice, in accordance with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. It was clarified that the findings regarding the penalty proceedings, where Form 5 was obtained, were correct and required no further adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC erred by dismissing the quantum appeal based on Form 5 obtained for penalty proceedings, thereby failing to adjudicate the quantum matter on its merits.
Sections Cited
Section 250(4), Section 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 23.08.2022 for the assessment year 2011-12 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that they have opted Vivad se Vishwas Scheme of the department in respect of penalty proceedings and that they had filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in respect of quantum matter. That as a matter of fact with regard to the penalty proceedings before the Vivad se vishwas Scheme of the department, the assessee successfully had obtained Form 5 which is also placed on record herein. However, with regard to quantum, the same was assailed before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC inadvertently had mistaken the receipt of Form 5 by the assessee through Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme of the Department as receipt with regard to quantum appeal before him. That in reality, the same was received by the assessee in respect of the penalty proceedings for which, the assessee had assailed before the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC however dismissed the appeal of the assessee on ground that assessee had received Form 5. In this way the quantum appeal remained un-adjudicated before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. In
3 Khushi Ram Dansena Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Raigarh ITA No.519/RPR/2025
other words, the quantum appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC remained un-adjudicated while the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that Form 5 has been received by the assessee which in fact was in respect of penalty proceedings and not on the quantum.
Having carefully considered and on examination of these facts, it emanates that so far as quantum appeal is concerned, there is no adjudication in the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. I, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand it back to its file for denovo adjudication as per law on quantum as had been assailed by the assessee while complying with the principles of natural justice. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC to pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act.
Before parting, it is also clarified that the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is correct to the extent of penalty proceedings since the assessee had moved an application through Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme before the department and obtained Form 5 in respect of such proceedings, therefore, there shall not be any adjudication by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in respect of the issue of penalty which is made to rest. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall only adjudicate on the quantum which it had left un-adjudicated.
4 Khushi Ram Dansena Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Raigarh ITA No.519/RPR/2025
As per the above terms grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 23rd day of September, 2025.
Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; �दनांक / Dated : 23rd September, 2025. SB, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5.
आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur
