MEGHANA PARESH JADHAV,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 10(1), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 573/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 April 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the quantum appeal concerning the addition for which the penalty was levied was still pending before the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was remitted to the CIT(A) to decide the penalty based on the outcome of the quantum appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a regular return of income for AY 2017-18. The AO observed a cash deposit of Rs. 13,65,000/- and, after no compliance to a notice, treated it as unexplained money and levied penalty under Section 271AAC(1).

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271AAC(1) can be decided independently of the quantum appeal. The appropriateness of levying penalty when the primary addition is under challenge.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAC(1),Section 139(1),Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Sandbhor, Shri Somnath M. Wajale
Hearing: 24.04.2024Pronounced: 24.04.2024

आदेश / ORDER

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 29.01.2024 confirming the levy of penalty u/s.271AAC(1) of the Act.

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are as under:

The appellant is an individual and no regular return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act was filed for the A.Y.2017-18. The AO, on the basis of information gathered during the phase of online verification under Operation Clean Money, observed that the appellant made cash deposit of Rs.13,65,000/- in the Cosmos Cooperative Bank, Pimpri, Pune. There was no compliance from the appellant to the notice u/s.142(1) of the Act and the assessment was completed by the AO u/s.144 of the Act on 17.12.2019 treating the said cash deposit as unexplained money u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. Thereafter, the AO vide order dated 17.01.2022 levied penalty of Rs.78,930/- u/s.271AAC(1) of the Act.

3.

Being aggrieved by the above penalty order, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

Heard both the sides and carefully examined the facts of the case. At the outset, it is informed at the Bar that the quantum appeal wherein the addition in respect of which the penalty u/s.271AAC(1) was levied is still pending for disposal before the CIT(A). In the peculiar circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the matter requires remission to the file of CIT(A) to decide the issue of levy of penalty u/s.271AAC(1) of the Act depending upon the outcome of the quantum appeal proceedings. I order accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 24th day of April, 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 →