KRISHNA DEVI,REWARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, REWARI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issues afresh. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an order affirming a penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to delay in filing, and the penalty order was allegedly passed without proper opportunity to the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty order was passed without affording proper opportunity to the assessee, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 20.08.2025 for the Assessment Year 2011-12 affirming the penalty order dated 19.06.2019 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).
At the outset, it was submitted by the ld. AR for the assessee that Assessing Officer has passed the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) without giving proper opportunity to the assessee and Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him. Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Upon careful consideration, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires to be restored to the file of Assessing Officer. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which Ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is directed to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 11th day of December, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026