NAVPARGANA RAJPUROHIT SAMAJ BHAMDHAM TRUST KALANDRI,SIROHI vs. ITO, WARD EXEMPTION, JODHPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 400/JODH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 July 2025AY 2019-20Bench: Dr. M. L. MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) rightly dismissed the appeals as not maintainable because the appeals were filed against the wrong orders. The Tribunal noted that the assessee's counsel made a mistake in not challenging the correct penalty orders.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals for assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 against penalty orders under section 270A. The assessee's appeals before the CIT(A) were dismissed as not maintainable because the appeals were filed challenging show cause notices dated 01.12.2021 instead of the actual penalty orders dated 01.01.2022 and 04.01.2022.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals filed before the CIT(A) were maintainable when they challenged show cause notices instead of the actual penalty orders passed under section 270A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR.

Before: Dr. M. L. MEENA & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR.

For Respondent: Shri Anil Dhaka, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 30/06/2025Pronounced: 07/07/2025

Result

8.

In view of the above discussion, both these appeal are hereby dismissed.

1.

Judicial Member having joined and presided over through virtual mode from Jaipur Benches, order needs pronouncement under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by placing the details on the notice board. Copy of the common order be placed in the connected appeal file. Files be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →