SH. APINDER PAL SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT, R-6, LUDHIANA

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').

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

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 CIT(A) .

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