Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 24/JPR/2023
Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the lower 6. authorities.
We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record. The Bench noted that in the appeal the assessee has filed u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, aggrieved from the order of the Assessing officer, wherein the ld. CIT(A) order also confirms that the appeal is against the order of u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act as written on first page, but on going through order placed before us, We noted that the findings
M/S Ramavtar Krishnavtar vs. ITO of the ld. CIT(A) order is related to the order of the assessee in quantum proceedings and there is no findings of penalty order. Considering this apparent mistake as per agreement of both the parties the matter is set aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh as there is no finding of ld. CIT(A) on order of the Assessing Officer passed U/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act in terms of these observation.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/02/2023.