M/S LOKMANYA SHIKSHAM SANSTHAN,DEWAS vs. THE JCIT EXEMPTION , BHOPAL, BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 394/IND/2022Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 March 2023AY 2012-13Bench: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal ex parte without granting an opportunity of hearing. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable institution, received and repaid loans in cash exceeding Rs. 20,000, violating Sections 269SS and 269T. Penalties were levied under Sections 271D and 271E. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution without a hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without providing an opportunity of hearing. Whether penalties under Sections 271D and 271E were rightly levied.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 269SS,Section 269T,Section 271D,Section 271E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri Venus Rawka, C.A
For Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT D.R
Hearing: 20.03.2023

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 07.09.2022 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi for A.Y. 2012-13.

2.

The grounds of appeal

raised by the assessee read as under: “1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case and passed an order on ex parte basis without giving the assessee the opportunity of being heard.

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and the facts of the case and levied the Penalty U/s 271D at Rs. 1,60,000/- & 271E at Rs. 2,20,000/- of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without considering full facts and legal position. The Penalty levied therefore is totally wrong and illegal on the facts of the case.

3. Ld. CIT(A) erred in levying penalty under section 271D and 271E without appreciating that neither the Assessee accepted nor repaid loan/ deposit in contravention of section 269SS and 269T respectively. Therefore Ld. JCIT has erred in not appreciating the facts of the case in right perspective.

M/s. Lokmanya Shikshan Sanstha Dewas vs. JCIT Asst.Year –2012-13 - 2 – 4. That the appellant craves to leave, add, alter or amend any of the ground at or before hearing.”

3.

The assessee is a charitable institution registered under Section 12A (AOP). The assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 25.03.2013 declaring total income of Rs. NIL. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order under Section 143(3) was passed on 27.03.2015. During the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer found that the assessee society received and made repayment of loan in cash that of Rs. 20,000/- or more in a day which is restricted the provisions of Section 269SS and 269T of the Act. Hence, the penalty under Section 271B & 271E of the Act was levied on 22.09.2017 at Rs. 3,80,000/-.

4.

Being aggrieved by the penalty order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

5.

The Ld. A.R. submitted that the CIT(A) dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution and no opportunity of hearing was granted to the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. A.R. requested that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) proper adjudication of the issues contested therein on merit.

6.

The Ld. D.R. relied upon the penalty order, assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A)

M/s. Lokmanya Shikshan Sanstha Dewas vs. JCIT Asst.Year –2012-13 - 3 – dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution and has not decided the issues on merit. Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back the issues contested by the assessee herein to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues on merit as per law. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.

8.

In result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 269SS

All 1,429 judgments and leading authorities on Section 269SS →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →