BHAGWAN SHREE SHANKESHWAR PARSHAWANATH JAIN DERASAR TRUST,THANE vs. ADDL/JT/DY/ACIT/ITO, NFASS.C, DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2057/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 February 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI KULDIP SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as it was filed beyond the limitation period and the assessee did not appear to seek condonation of delay. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee were not considered on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a trust, filed its return of income. During scrutiny, it was found that the trust was not registered under Section 12A and was treated as an AOP. A penalty was levied under Section 270A for misreporting income.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the assessee was maintainable due to being time-barred and the absence of the assessee for hearing and condonation of delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 143(2),Section 250,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Ld. DR
Hearing: 14/12/2023Pronounced: 26/02/2024

PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short “NFAC”), Delhi dated 21.03.2023 u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for A.Y. 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

A) Penalty u/s. 270A - Rs. 4,76,200/-

1.

Bhagwan Shree Shankeshwar Parshavanath Jain Derasar Trust 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] erred on facts and in law in confirming the order passed by the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (AO) u / s 270A levying a penalty of Rs. 4,76,200/- on the appellant.

2) The learned CIT(A) and the AO failed to appreciate that the appellant had no mis- reported its income, which would justify a penalty of Rs. 4,76,200/- on the appellant.

3) The appellant prays that the penalty of Rs. 4, 76,200/- levied by the AO u/s. 270A and confirmed by the CIT (A) may be deleted.

B) General 4) The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one another and the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete or modify any of the above grounds of appeal.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust that filed its return of income on 31-03-2018 declaring total income at Rs. 3,34,630/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 13-08-2018. During the assessment proceedings, it was revealed that the assessee is not an entity registered u/s. 12A of the Act; hence same was treated as an AOP. During the year consideration, the assessee has shown an income of Rs. 29,06,084/- against the expenditure incurred of Rs. 21,35,539/-, resulting in a surplus of Rs. 7,70,546/-. As a benefit under section 12A of the Act can’t be provided to the assessee, income for Tax was taken at Rs. 7,70,546/- and penalty proceedings were initiated u/s. 270A of the Act.

Bhagwan Shree Shankeshwar Parshavanath Jain Derasar Trust 3. Thereafter, AO proceeded with penalty proceedings and a penalty @ 200% on the amount of tax applicable on misreported income amounting to Rs. 4, 76,200/- was imposed. Assessee being aggrieved with this order of AO preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), who in turn confirmed the order of AO. Assessee being further aggrieved preferred the present appeal before us.

4.

We have gone through the order of AO passed u/s. 143(3) and 270A of the Act, Order of Ld. CIT(A) passed u/s. 250 of the Act and submissions of the Assessee. It is also observed that the appeal filed by the assessee is time-barred by almost 21 days, this fact is there on record and duly communicated to the assessee. The case of the assessee was neither attended by any of its authorized representatives nor any written submission along with an application for condonation of delay filed. This is 3rd time the matter was fixed before the bench, but none appeared. In these circumstances, as technically also matter is not eligible for hearing as the delay was neither justified by the assessee nor condoned by the bench, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee, with the liberty that the assessee can file an M.A. along with an application for condonation of delay. Because of the above grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 270A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →