FRONTLINE ELECTRONICS LIMITED,PUNE V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8, PUNE

ITA 2064/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Frontline Electronics Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order by the CIT(A) / NFAC, which was deemed invalid as it was issued without jurisdiction over an appeal that had already been decided by CIT(A)-13, Pune. The original appeal pertained to the assessment year 2011-12, where the assessee sought a deduction under section 80-IC of the ITA, 1961, amounting to Rs.32,95,032, which was granted in the earlier decision. The CIT(A) / NFAC's subsequent order dismissed the appeal due to non-appearance, leading to the current appeal by the assessee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826628 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BASAVARAJ HIREM ATH
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR B PHADKE
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2064/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2011-12 Frontline Electronics Ltd. Plot No.E-7 B/2, Chakan Industrial Area, Phase III, Nighoje, Khed, Pune – 410501 Vs. DCIT, Circle – 8, Pune PAN: AAACF2689P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department by : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 05-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 07-01-2026 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.07.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2011-12. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under: 1. Appellant contends that the order passed by the learned CIT(A), NFAC on 14/07/2025 by dismissing appeal is invalid and bad in law, as the said order is passed without Jurisdiction. The learned CIT(A), NFAC ought to have appreciated that the appeal for AY 2011-12 was already decided by the learned CIT(A)-13, Pune vide order dated 20/06/2018. 2. The learned CIT(A), NFAC further ought to have appreciated that based on the order of the learned CIT(A)-13, Pune dated 20/06/2018, the learned faceless AO had dropped the penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the ITA, 1961 by passing order on 06/01/2022 for AY 2011-12. 3. Appellant contends that the order passed by the learned CIT(A)-13, Pune on 20/06/2018 be restored and appellant should be granted deduction u/s 80-IC of the ITA, 1961 of Rs.32,95,032/- as per the said order dated 20/06/2018. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2064/PUN/2025 4. Appellant craves leave to add/alter/modify/amend/delete all / any of the Grounds of Appeal. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset filed a copy of the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for this very assessment year on 20.06.2018. Further, following the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessing Officer has dropped the penalty proceedings initiated by him u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). He submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC is a duplicate one passed on 14.07.2025 and he has dismissed the appeal on account of non-appearance. He submitted that since the appeal has already been decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 20.06.2018, therefore, the present appeal order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC becomes infructuous. 4. The Ld. DR on the other hand fairly conceded that the Ld. CIT(A) has already decided the issue in favour of the assessee vide order dated 20.06.2018 and following the said order, the Assessing Officer has also dropped the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Due to some technical errors, the appeal has again been fixed by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 5. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. A perusal of the details furnished by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that the Ld. CIT(A) has already decided the issue in favour of the assessee vide order dated 20.06.2018. We find following the above order, the Assessing Officer has dropped the penalty proceedings initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2064/PUN/2025 the Act. Since the issue in this appeal relates to the deduction claimed u/s 80IC of the Act amounting to Rs.67,85,548/- which has already been decided by the Ld. CIT(A) in favour of the assessee and since the Assessing Officer following the said order has dropped the penalty proceedings initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, therefore, the present order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on this very issue dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution becomes infructuous. Accordingly, the same is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 7th January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 7th January, 2026 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2064/PUN/2025 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 05.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 05.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Office Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "