LAKSHMI NARAYAN COAL AND MINES LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GUWAHATI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 32/GTY/2020Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 October 2022AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and lacked merit-based discussion. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) upheld by the CIT(A). The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, leading to an ex-parte decision. The CIT(A)'s order was also ex-parte, with no opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) was valid, and whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH,

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI SONJOY SARMA]

Hearing: 17.10.2022Pronounced: 19.10.2022

ORDER

PER SONJOY SARMA, JM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee to the assessment year 2010-11 is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) – 2, Guwahati dated 30.10.2019 which is arising out of the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 25.04.2019 by ITO, Ward-1(3), Guwahati. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: “i. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – Guwahati 2, Guwahati has erred in law and facts in upholding the order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) by the ld. ITO, Ward-1(3), Guwahati in the case of the appellant, without considering that the order of the ld. Assessing Officer is arbitrary, illegal, unjustified and against the provisions of law. ii. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to consider that the notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is invalid and bad in law as it fails to specify under which limb of the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is to be levied, i.e. either for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars. Hence, the penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is void ab initio.

Lakshmi Narayan Coal And Mines Limited AY 2010-11 iii. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to consider that the addition upon which penalty has been imposed has been already deleted by the Hon’ble ITAT, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati. iv. The appellant craves leave to add, amend/modify any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing or before the hearing of appeal.”

2.

At the time of hearing no one appeared on behalf of the assessee nor file any submission before us. Therefore, we have no other option but to decide the appeal ex-parte with the assistance of ld. DR.

3.

While we perusing the material available on record, the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and assessee did not get any opportunity to file relevant documents and submission before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we in the interest of justice one more opportunity should be given to the assessee and the issue raised in the instant appeal may be set aside to the file of ld. CIT(A).

4.

We, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances of the case are of the considered view that since the order of the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and no discussion has been made on the merits of the case. We in the interest of justice set aside the impugned order and remit it back to the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issues raised before us by way of speaking order. We direct the assessee to remain vigilant in receiving the notices of hearing of the ld. CIT(A) and should not take any further adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause and should file all necessary documents so as to facilitate the ld. CIT(A) for passing the speaking order. Needless to mention that the assessee should be given proper opportunity of being heard.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →