LAXMIBAI RAMBHAU PATHARE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 7(3), PUNE, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the penalty appeal afresh after the quantum appeal is decided. The CIT(A)/NFAC was directed to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A)/NFAC confirming a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was heard. The quantum appeal for the assessment year 2015-16 was still pending before the CIT(A)/NFAC.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be adjudicated independently of the quantum appeal, and the procedure for dealing with ex-parte orders when the primary appeal is pending.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS ASTHA CHANDRA
Assessee by : Shri Pramod S Shingte Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 26-09-2024 Date of pronouncement : 30-09-2024 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order dated 24.04.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC relating to assessment year 2015-16.
Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the penalty of Rs.1,10,63,435/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessment in this case was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.3,39,63,669/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.1,10,63,435/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being 100% of the tax sought to be evaded. He submitted that the quantum appeal is still pending before the CIT(A) / NFAC. In the meantime, the CIT(A) / NFAC in the ex-parte order passed by him confirmed the penalty so levied by the Assessing Officer. He accordingly submitted that he has no objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) / NFAC for adjudication of the issue afresh after the quantum appeal is decided.
The Ld. DR fairly conceded that the quantum appeal is still pending before the CIT(A) / NFAC.
After hearing both the sides, we find the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act has determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.3,39,63,669/- and the quantum appeal is still pending before the CIT(A) / NFAC. Since despite number of opportunities granted, the assessee did not file any reply, the CIT(A) / NFAC in the ex-parte order passed by him sustained the penalty so levied by the Assessing Officer. Since the quantum appeal is still pending before the CIT(A) / NFAC, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case, we deem it proper to restore the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to decide the appeal after the quantum appeal is decided. While doing so, he shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to participate in the appellate proceedings on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the CIT(A) / NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th September, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 30th September, 2024 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr.CIT 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 26.09.2024 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 30.09.2024 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Head 9 Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026