HOTEL RADHIKA ,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 755/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the quantum appeal related to the penalty was restored to the CIT(A). Therefore, the penalty order was also remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh assessment of the penalty.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a partnership firm, filed its return of income. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment at a higher income, making disallowances and additions. Subsequently, a penalty was levied under Section 270A for misreporting of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under Section 270A is sustainable when the quantum appeal is restored to the CIT(A) for denovo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate
For Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade
Hearing: 31.05.2024Pronounced: 31.05.2024

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 29.11.2023 confirming the levy of penalty u/s.270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Act’) for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a Partnership firm. The Return of Income for the A.Y. 2018-19 was filed on 29.10.2018 declaring income of Rs.2,37,630/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) at a total income of Rs.11,11,618/-. While doing so, the AO made the disallowance of interest on remuneration paid to partners of Rs.7,95,058/- and also made addition of Rs.78,930/, being interest on income-tax refund. Thereafter, the AO levied penalty of Rs.4,91,346/- u/s.270A of the Act on account of misreporting of income.

3.

Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC who vide impugned order confirmed the levy of penalty.

4.

Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.

5.

We heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the relevant material on record. The quantum appeal – in respect of which the penalty was levied u/s.270A was restored to the file of CIT(A). Therefore, in the fitness of things, in our considered view, this penalty order shall also be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for denovo assessment of penalty in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on this 31st day of May, 2024.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →