Shri. Shankar Sadashiv Dangat, Pune V. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Pune

ITA 230/PUN/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9711 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 230/PUN/2020 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shankar Sadashiv Dangat, Virangula Residency, Sadashiv Dangat Nagar, Ambegaon Bk, Pune 411 046 Maharashtra PAN : AGMPD9426H Vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-1, Pune on 10-12-2019 confirming the penalty of Rs.10,23,903/- imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2013-14. 2. Having heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the quantum appeal of the assessee came up for consideration before the Tribunal. Vide Assessee by Shri Abhay Shastri Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 07-06-2022 Date of pronouncement 07-06-2022 ITA No. 230/PUN/2020 Shankar Sadashiv Dangat 2 order dated 22-01-2020, the Tribunal in ITA No.523/PUN/2017 has restored the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision. Since the matter in the quantum proceedings has gone back to the ld. CIT(A), we are of the considered opinion that it would be in the fitness of things if the matter concerning the penalty on such amount is also sent back to the ld. first appellate authority to be decided in conformity with the view that he canvasses on the additions in the proceedings pursuant to the directions given by the Tribunal. We order accordingly. Our view in restoring the penalty to the ld. CIT(A) is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Mohatram Farooqui vs. CIT (SC) 2010-TIOL-23- SC-IT in which it has been held that if addition is restored to the AO, then penalty should also be restored. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Sanjay Gupta vs. CIT (2014) 366 ITR 18 (Del) has also held that where the quantum has been remanded to the AO, the question of penalty on account of the said amount being treated as undisclosed income, should also be remanded to the AO. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed a reasonable opportunity of hearing in such fresh proceedings. ITA No. 230/PUN/2020 Shankar Sadashiv Dangat 3 3. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 07 th June, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; दनांक Dated : 07 th June, 2022 Satish आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. यथ / The Respondent; 3. 4. 5. The CIT(A)-1, Pune The Pr.CIT-1, Pune िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “B” / DR ‘B’, ITAT, Pune 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune ITA No. 230/PUN/2020 Shankar Sadashiv Dangat 4 Date 1. Draft dictated on 07-06-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 07-06-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *