SASCO SILENCERS PRIVATE LIMTED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD 3(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 405/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2024AY 2018-19Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT, while acknowledging the assessee's negligence, restored the penalty appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication to provide an opportunity for the assessee to defend its case, adhering to the principle of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against a penalty order under Section 270A for Rs. 41 Lacs was confirmed by the CIT(A) as the assessee did not appear before the AO or the appellate authority. The assessee is now in further appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty appeal should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication to allow the assessee an opportunity to present its case, despite prior non-appearance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018- 19 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 20-12-2023 in the matter of penalty levied by Ld. AO u/s 270A for Rs.41 Lacs vide order dated 04-02-2022. It could be seen that during penalty proceedings, the assessee did not appear before ld. AO. The position remained the same during appellate proceedings and accordingly, the penalty was confirmed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Ld. AR submitted that quantum appeal is pending before first appellate authority. The Ld. AR prayed that this appeal may also be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) so as to enable the assessee to defend its case. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

3.

Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the penalty appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with disposal of appeal on merits.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 1st May, 2024 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 01-05-2024 DS आदेशकीTितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. " थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 270A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →