B.N. Developers Private Limited, Kendrapada V. ITO, Kendrapada Ward, Kendrapada

ITA 147/CTK/2022

AI Insights

The case involves B.N. Developers Pvt Ltd., which appealed against the penalty of Rs.1,03,410 levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16. The penalty was initially confirmed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. The assessee contested that the penalty notice was not properly issued as it did not strike off the relevant clauses, and also claimed non-receipt of the notice from the ld CIT(A). The revenue argued that the assessee had been given substantial opportunities to appear before the ld CIT(A), which they did not utilize. The Tribunal found that the ld CIT(A) had not adjudicated the penalty on merits and thus restored the matter for fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 141495 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER B.N.Developers Pvt Ltd., At: Baniamal, PO: College Road, Tinimuhani, Kendrapara PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, 23/10343774830 penalty of Rs.1,03,410/ 2. Shri K.K.Bal Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. It was submitted by penalty without striking off of the relevant clause was the further submission that the notice alleged to have been issued by IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.147/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 B.N.Developers Pvt Ltd., At: Baniamal, PO: College Road, Tinimuhani, Kendrapara Vs. ITO, Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara PAN/GIR No.AABCB 6183 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri K.K.Bal, AR Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Date of Hearing : 10 /01 Date of Pronouncement : 10/01 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld , NFAC, Delhi, dated 8.7.2022 in Appeal No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022 43774830(1) for the assessment year 2015 penalty of Rs.1,03,410/-, levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act Shri K.K.Bal, AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the Assessing Officer has levied penalty without striking off of the relevant clauses in the penalty notice. It was the further submission that the notice alleged to have been issued by Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO, Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara Respondent) , AR S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR 01/2023 /01/2023 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 2015-16 confirming the levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. , AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld ld AR that the Assessing Officer has levied in the penalty notice. It was the further submission that the notice alleged to have been issued by ITA No.147/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Page2 | 3 the ld CIT(A) has not been received by the assessee. It was the submission that the penalty as levied by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) is liable to be deleted or alternatively the issue in this appeal may be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that the assessee has not appeared before the ld CIT(A) even though substantial opportunities have been granted. It was the submission that these are fresh arguments being placed by the ld AR and same cannot be considered. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that the ld CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue of penalty on merits. Ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not appeared before him in the course of hearing. It is noticed that the ld CIT(A) has in para 4 of his order mentioned that four opportunities have been granted to the assessee by sending notice through registered e-mail but the assessee has submitted that he has not received any mail. It is possible that the notice sent in mail could have gone to the spam folder. This being so, considering the interest of justice, we are of the view that the issue in this appeal may be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for re-adjudication. Accordingly, we restore the issue in this appeal to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. ITA No.147/CTK/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Page3 | 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 10/01/2023. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 10/01/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : B.N.Developers Pvt Ltd., At: Baniamal, PO: College Road, Tinimuhani, Kendrapara 2. The Respondent: ITO, Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara 3. The CIT(A)-, NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT-, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//