VIVEKANAND ,NOIDA GAUTOM BUDDH NAGAR vs. ITO WARD 3(4) NOIDA GBN, NOIDA GAUTOM BUDDH NAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2352/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 October 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)3 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 held that since the additions made in the assessment order were restored to the Assessing Officer, the penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) would not survive. The penalty order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The Assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) sustaining a penalty under Section 271AAC(1) of the Act for AY 2018-19. The original assessment order under Section 147 was restored to the AO for fresh decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271AAC(1) survives when the additions leading to the penalty are set aside and restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAC(1),Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI M BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Shri Raghuraj Singh, Advocate, Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.08.2025

Assessee by Shri Raghuraj Singh, Advocate Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Revenue by सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 16.08.2025 28.10.2025 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 27.02.2025 for the AY 2018-19 in sustaining the penalty levied u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act.

2.

Heard rival contentions. order dated 24.09.2025 against the additions made in the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide afresh after providing adequate opportunity to the Assessee. The relevant portion of the order of the Tribunal is as under:

“2. On hearing both the sides, we find that amongst other grounds on merits, the assessee has raised a ground that the assessee was not given an opportunity of hearing in accordance with the principles of natural justice. On going through the records, we find that the assessee’s case was reopened u/s 148 of the Act on the basis of cash deposits of Rs.90,000/- and cash withdrawals of Rs.1,97,09,500/- from Allahabad Bank and having received commission on brokerage of Rs.1,61,480/- from M/s Vakrangee Limited. However, the assessee failed to respond to the notices and assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and as the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A), the appeal was also dismissed in the absence of any submissions from the assessee. The case of the assessee is that the assessee is an agent and on account of his principle he used to receive cash which was deposited or withdrawn. The Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee was not aware of the notices being received on ITBA portal and for that reason, could not defend the case.

3.

In the light of the aforesaid, for the ends of justice, the issues on merits are restored to the files of the AO to give the assessee a fresh opportunity of hearing and decide in accordance with law.”

4.

Since the additions made in the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act were restored to the file of the Assessing Officer the penalty levied u/s 271AAC(1) will not survive and aside and restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and to decide in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to the Assessee.

5.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.10.2025

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 →