M/S.GEETHAM STEELS PVT. LTD.,,NAMAKKAL vs. ACIT, NAMAKKAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1185/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 July 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte, violating principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was set aside and remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was against a penalty of Rs. 1,34,51,036/- confirmed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance. The assessee requested one more opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty was rightly confirmed ex-parte without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 24.06.2024Pronounced: 12.07.2024

O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 against confirming the penalty of Rs. 1,34,51,036/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] vide order dated 23.02.2024. :- 2 -:

2.

At the outset, the Ld. A.R has submitted that huge penalty of Rs. 1,34,51,036/- has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and therefore, one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee.

3.

The Ld. Departmental Representative has relied on the orders of the authorities below.

4.

We have heard both the parties and gone through the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the order has been passed by Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte for the non- compliance of the assessee. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate this appeal afresh in accordance with law, after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. We also direct the Assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. :- 3 -:

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 12th July, 2024. (यस यस िव"ने" रिव) (जगदीश) (Jagadish) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) "ाियक सद / Judicial Member लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य /Accountant Member सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 12th July, 2024. EDN/-

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →