L.G. BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. ASST. C.I.T., BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1535/BANG/2014Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 November 2015AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's adjournment requests were not mechanical and granted one last opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The matter was set aside and remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against penalty levied under Section 271AAA following additions made under Section 153C. The assessee failed to appear before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) despite multiple opportunities, submitting only adjournment letters.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271AAA was rightly levied without affording a proper opportunity to the assessee to explain its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAA,Section 153C,Section 274

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

For Appellant: Shri K.Yadavan, ITP
For Respondent: Shri M.Vijay Kumar, ACIT (DR)
Hearing: 26/11/2015

to 1536/Bang/2014 M/s.L.G.Builders & Developers & Another Page 2 of 3 2. Assessee in both these appeals assail levy of penalty under section 271AAA r.w.s.274 of the IT Act. Penalty levied was on account of addition pursuant to proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. AO has mentioned in his order that explanation of the assessee was not acceptable and section 271AAA stood attracted. Assessee’s appeals before CIT(A) was not successful. It seems despite number of chances, assessee did not appear, except for filing adjournment petition.

3.

We have heard the counsel. It is true that the assessee was given number of chances by the AO for explaining why penalty should not be imposed on the addition made to the returned income. The CIT(A) had also given five opportunities to the assessee, when the matter came before him. It is a fact that the assessee had filed adjournment letters in each of these occasions. The CIT(A) himself has in his order summarized the contents of such adjournment letters. The reasons mentioned in the adjournment letters were different and not identical. In our opinion, assessee was not acting mechanically while seeking adjournment. Ends of justice will be met if one last chance is given to the assessee to explain its position. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter back to his file for consideration afresh in accordance with law. Assessee shall be given one final opportunity by the CIT(A). CIT(A) will be free to proceed in accordance with law whether the assessee enters appearance on that day or not. to 1536/Bang/2014 M/s.L.G.Builders & Developers & Another Page 3 of 3 7. In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the years are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 271AAA

All 606 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →