PRATEEK JUYAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1090/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 April 2022AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not provided with a sufficient opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) to decide the issue after giving the assessee a proper chance to present their case.

What were the facts?

Following a search under Section 132, the assessee filed a return of income. Subsequently, a penalty under Section 271AAA was levied. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-appearance, though the CIT(A) also noted a lack of supporting evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the lower appellate authority. The validity of the penalty levied under Section 271AAA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 271AAA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: Dr. B. R. R. KumarSh. Yogesh Kumar US

Hearing: 25.04.2022Pronounced: 29.04.2022

ORDER

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-IV, Kanpur dated 16.01.2017.

2.

The assessee is an individual. The assessee is deriving income from business, income from capital gains and income from other sources. A search u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated and took place in the business and residential premises of the assessee on 21.10.2010 in the Juyal group of cases. A notice u/s 153A(1)(a) was issued on 14.02.2012 for A.Y. 2011-12 and was served upon the assessee requiring him to furnish the return of income on or before 05.03.2012. The assessee filed his return of income on 08.02.2013 declaring an income of Rs.63,36,160/-. After the Prateek Juyal conclusion of the proceeding u/s 153A, penalty u/s 271AAA has been levied on the assessee.

3.

Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the levy of penalty u/s 271AAA who had dismissed the appeal of the assessee owing to non-appearance before him on three different occasions. The ld. CIT(A) has also held that the case is being discussed on merits and held that from the records “no evidence has been furnished by the appellant during the appeal proceedings in support of the claim made”.

4.

Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before us.

5.

The appeal has been filed on 23.02.2017 and on the hearing held today on 25.04.2022 none appeared on behalf of the assessee or no letter of adjournment has been filed. From the records, we find that the notice of hearing has been duly served. Hence, we proceed to decide the issue based on the records available before us. The assessee has raised the ground that the appellant was not provided full and sufficient opportunity of being heard. Hence, in the fitness of things, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue after affording an opportunity to the assessee. We also direct that the assessee shall comply to the notice issued by the revenue authorities from time to time without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

Prateek Juyal 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29/04/2022.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →