ULAGNATHA NADAR SHANMUGAKANI KUMAR,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD- 19(6), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 37/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 April 2024AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while agreeing with the Revenue, granted another opportunity to the assessee on the principle of natural justice. The impugned order was set aside, and the penalty issue was restored to the AO for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee is aggrieved by the confirmation of a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 272A(1)(d) for failing to make any representation. The assessee did not appear before the AO and during appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) was rightly confirmed without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

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

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ/वाल ,लेखा सद3 एवं माननीय +ी मनु कुमार िग7र, �ाियक सद3 के सम8। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Ulaganatha Nadar ITO Shanmugakani Krishna Kumar Non-Corporate Ward-19(6), बनाम/ Vs. 4, V.V. Koil Street, Saidapet, Chennai. Chennai-600 015. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ALHPK-5868-L (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Ms. Sree Lakshmi Valli (Advocate)-Ld.AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 16-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aggrieved by confirmation of penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) for Rs.10,000/- vide impugned order dated 27.12.2023, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The impugned penalty has been levied by Ld. AO vide order dated 15.12.2021 wherein the assessee failed to make any representation. The position remained the same during appellate proceedings. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity to defend the case of the assessee. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the issue of levy of penalty stand restored back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the disposal of issue on merits.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 16th April, 2024.

More judgments on Section 272A(1)(d)

All 1,125 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(1)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →