Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeals have been preferred by the assessee
against the separate orders dated 20.11.2017 of the Commissioner
of Income Tax(A)-3, Ludhiana [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’]
agitating the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the levy of penalty
imposed by the Assessing officer 271D and 271E of the Income-tax
Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
Since the facts and issue involved in both the appeals relating
to levy of penalty are identical, therefore, these have been heard
ITA Nos. 146 & 147/Chd/2018- Sh. Apinder Pal Singh, Ludhiana 2
together and are being disposed of by this common order. ITA
No.146/Chd/2018 is taken as a lead case for narration of facts.
ITA No. 146/Chd/2018
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our
attention to the impugned order of the CIT(A) to state that the
impugned order is an ex-parte order. That the assessee due to
unavoidable circumstances could not attend the proceedings before
the CIT(A), therefore, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the impugned penalty. .
The Ld. Counsel has further invited our attention to the application
for additional evidence to submit that the assessee wants to rely upon
the evidence to prove that the penalty u/s 271D is not leviable in
the case of the assessee. The Ld. counsel has further submitted that
assessee may be given opportunity to present his cases before the Ld.
CIT(A).
The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied upon the findings of
the CIT(A) .
After considering the above submissions of the Ld. Counsel for
the assessee and considering the fact that the impugned order of
CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and the assessee has also furnished
additional evidence which goes to the root of the case, the
application of the assessee for furnishing of additional evidence is
hereby allowed. The impugned order of the CIT(A) is hereby set
aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a
direction to admit additional evidence sought to be furnished by the
ITA Nos. 146 & 147/Chd/2018- Sh. Apinder Pal Singh, Ludhiana 3
assessee and then to decide the case afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say that CIT(A) will provide proper opportunity to the assessee to present himself or through his counsel on the date of hearing and the assessee will cooperate and will not contribute to any unnecessary adjournment of the case.
ITA No. 147/Chd/2018 6. Since the facts and issue involved in this appeal are identical to that of ITA No. 146/Chd/29017, our findings arrived at will apply mutatis-mutandis to this appeal also.
In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 02.08.2018
Sd/- Sd/- (B.R.R KUMAR) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 02.08.2018 Rkk Copy to: • The Appellant • The Respondent • The CIT • The CIT(A) • The DR