ARUMUGAM RAJALAKSHMI,CHENNAI V. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-5(3), CHENNAI

ITA 51/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Arumugam Rajalakshmi against a penalty levied by the Income Tax Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for concealment of income. The penalty of Rs. 15,03,800 was initially imposed through an ex-parte order. The assessee contested the penalty, arguing that the appeal against the related assessment order had been restored to the CIT(A) by the ITAT in a quantum appeal, and thus, the penalty appeal should also be restored to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive review. The tribunal agreed with this perspective, noting the need for a thorough examination of the penalty in light of the restored assessment order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107234 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: G. AKASH
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी एबी टी. वक , \u0011ा ियक सद! एवं \u0019ी जगदीश, लेखा सद! क े सम( BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.51/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arumugam Rajalakshmi, New No.12, Old No.3, Zackaria Colony, III Street, Cholaimedu, Chennai – 600 094. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward-5(3), Chennai. [PAN: AGBPR 6558F] (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri G.Akash, Advocate GHथ की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Chennai-19 [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 02.08.2024 in the matter of penalty levied by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 23.09.2021. ITA No.51/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. There is a delay of 99 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. The effective ground of appeal is against confirming the penalty levied by the A.O u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act without provided proper opportunity and dismissing the appeal. 4. The A.O has levied penalty of Rs.15,03,800/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income in ex-parte order passed on 19.01.2022. On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the penalty observing that it is evident from the assessment order and the penalty order that assessee has failed to discharge the onus vested in her regarding cash deposit added by the A.O. The Ld AR has submitted that the appeal against the assessment order based on which penalty has been levied has been restored back to the file of Ld CIT(A) by the Hon’ble ITAT in quantum appeal, therefore this appeal may also be restored to the file of Ld CIT(A) in the interests of justice . 5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities. ITA No.51/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: 6. We have heard both the parties and carefully examined the orders of the lower authorities. We find that penalty order has been passed ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order on the basis of finding in the assessment order. As submitted by the Ld. AR, the Hon’ble ITAT has restored the matter in quantum appeal to the file of Ld CIT(A), therefore penalty matter also need to be restored to the file of Ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a denovo adjudication. We also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and to be diligent in submitting the relevant details for the adjudication of the case as and when called for. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वक ) (ABY. T. Varkey) \u0011ाियक सद! / Judicial Member (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा सद! /Accountant Member चे\u0010नई/Chennai, \u0013दनांक/Dated: 28th March, 2025. EDN/- ITA No.51/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: आदेश क\u0016 \bितिल\u0019प अ\u001aे\u0019षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\b/Appellant 2. थ\b/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u0010/CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0019 फाईल/GF "