VARDHMAN BUILDTECH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. JT.CIT, RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 15.11.2022 for the assessment year 2014-15.

In this case, assessee was imposed penalty of Rs.30,12,420/- under section 272A(2)(g) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) by the JCIT in order dated 30.09.2016.

Brief statement of facts by assessee before the ld. CIT (A) read as under :- “Appellant was imposed penalty of Rs.3012420 under section 272A 2 g by Ld. Joint Commissioner vide impugned order dt. 30.09.2016. According to him the appellant did not comply with provision of Section 203 of the Act. The appellant has delayed in issuing TDS certificate thereby attracting penalty under section 272A 2 g of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The proceeding for imposition of penalty was initiated through a Show Cause Notice under section 272A 2 g read with section 274 1 dated 22.03.2016 in response to the above final reply dated 06.04.2016 was filed by the appellant. The submission of the appellant was not considered by Ld. Joint Commissioner as a result penalty of Rs.3012420 was imposed. Feeling aggrieved with the order of Ld Joint Commissioner the appellant has preferred an appeal.”

After noting the above, the ld. CIT (A) noted that several opportunities were given to the assessee but assessee did not avail the same. Hence, ld. CIT (A) concluded as under :- “7.2 Though the appellant claims that the AO was not justified in making such assessment, he never put forth any reasons for claiming so. Even during current appellant proceedings, the appellant never came forward with the explanation to the grounds mentioned by the appellant despite being offered number of opportunities through hearing notices issued by this office. The onus lies on the appellant to prove his case before seeking relief in the appellant proceedings. On this front, appellant miserably failed. In these circumstances, it is deemed fit not to interfere with the assessment made by the AO. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO is upheld and grounds are dismissed.”

Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted assessee was undergoing CIRP under the order of NCLT. Hence, it was not in a position to attend the notices sent by the income-tax officials. He prayed that now assessee is in a position to canvass the appeal. Hence, he prayed that an opportunity may be granted to appear before the ld. CIT (A).

Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any opposition to this proposition. 8. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we remit the issue to the file of ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) shall pass an order after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. Assessee is also directed to cooperate with the Department in this regard. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 28th day of May, 2024.