DEBRUP BANIK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 50(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2046/KOL/2024Status: HeardITAT Kolkata05 December 2024AY 2017-2018Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the AO, directing that the quantum and penalty issues be decided together. The assessee was given one opportunity to present its case before the lower authorities.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty order imposed under Section 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was confirmed by the CIT(A) and the AO had passed an ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty order was passed ex-parte without considering the merits of the case and if the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM]

Pronounced: 05.12.2024

ORDER Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 21.08.2024for AY 2017-18 arising out of penalty order passed u/s. 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) by AO, e-Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 21.01.2022.

2.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this appeal has been passed against the confirmation of penalty of Rs.61,800/- as imposed by the AO u/s. 271AAC(1) of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the quantum appeal in this case is already pending before the AO. The Ld. AR further submitted that since penalty order has been passed ex parte without considering merits of the case, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play the present appeal may also be restored to the file of the AO so that both the cases i.e. quantum as well as penalty issue could be decided together.

3.

Ld. DR, on the other hand, left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we observe that the AO has imposed this penalty for non-compliance by passing ex-parte order.

Debrup Banik, AY 2017-18 Even during the penalty proceeding, the assessee was non-compliant before the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A). Considering these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that to mitigate the ends of justice, assessee should be given one opportunity to present its case before the lower authorities. Therefore, we restore this appeal before the AO with a direction to decide the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing by considering our observation made hereinabove and in accordance with law.

5.

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

Order is pronounced in the open court on 5th December, 2024

More judgments on Section 271AAC(1)

All 1,211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAC(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →