ARUN NAMDEV KENI,TALOJA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5, PANVEL, PANVEL

ITA 366/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Arun Namdev Keni, the appellant, who contested a penalty of Rs. 2,02,28,270 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act by the ITO, Ward-5, Panvel. The penalty was based on an ex-parte order following an assessment that determined the appellant's income to be Rs.6,00,79,090 for the assessment year 2014-15. The CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appellant's appeal due to a delay in filing, without condoning the delay or adjudicating on the merits. The Tribunal noted that the quantum addition, which was the basis for the penalty, had been set aside in a previous ruling and thus remanded the penalty issue back to the CIT(A) for a decision post the quantum appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774726 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMOL KHAIRNAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.366/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Arun Namdev Keni, At Pethali, Taloja, Panvel- 410208. PAN : AMGPK2155A Vs. ITO, Ward-5, Panvel. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, erred in not condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits. Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 05.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 03.09.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.366/PUN/2025 2 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 2,02,28,270/-. 4. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, erred in confirming the penalty, even though the appeal against the assessment was already set aside by the Hon. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune. 5. The appellant craves the leave to amend, alter, add or delete any of the grounds of appeal, before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee is an individual and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the IT Act was completed vide order 20.12.2016 wherein income of Rs.6,00,79,090/- was determined by the Assessing Officer. Subsequently, penalty of Rs.2,02,28,270/- was also imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act by an ex-parte order dated 27.06.2017. 4. Against the above penalty order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the appeal was filed belatedly, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. It is this above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. When the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee despite due service of notice of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.366/PUN/2025 3 hearing. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record and after hearing Ld. DR. 7. We heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the appeal involving the issue of quantum addition, on the basis of which impugned penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act was imposed, has already been set-aside by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case vide ITA No.813/PUN/2024 for assessment year 2014-15 order dated 12.09.2024 by observing as under :- “8. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find there was a delay of 211 days in filing of the appeal before the CIT(A) / NFAC for which he did not condone the delay. Further, due to non- compliance from the side of the assessee, he dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the appeal for assessment year 2013-14 is still pending before the CIT(A) / NFAC and the delay in filing of the appeal was also explained before the CIT(A) / NFAC. 9. From the various details furnished by the assessee, we find the assessee is a farmer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC) has held that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. It has further held that refusing to condone the delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. In light of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and considering the fact that the appeal for assessment Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.366/PUN/2025 4 year 2013-14 is still pending before the CIT(A) / NFAC, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submissions before the CIT(A) / NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the CIT(A) / NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.” 8. Since the appeal against the quantum addition, on the basis of which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act was imposed, has already been set-aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh on merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC involving the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act and remand the matter back to his file with a direction to condone the delay and decide the penalty appeal afresh as per fact & law after disposing of quantum appeal of the same assessment year. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce requisite documents/evidences/explanations in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass an Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.366/PUN/2025 5 appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 03rd day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 03rd September, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "