, ‘D’ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 261/Ahd/2021 ( Assess ment Ye ar : 2015-16) M a lat aj C o- Op er a tiv e Cre di t So ci ety Li mit ed Sar da r Pa tel B ha va n, Nr . To wer , At . Ma lat aj , Ta : So jit ra , Ma lat aj -3 8 72 20 / V s . In co me T ax Of fi ce r W ar d- 1( 3) (1 ), Pet la d यी ल सं./ ीआ आर सं./P A N / G IR N o . : A A A A M 6 9 6 8 J (अपील Appellant) . . ( य / Respondent) अपील र स /Appellant by : Ms . Art i N. S ha h, A. R. य क र स / Respondent by : Shri Mod. Usman, CIT.D.R. & Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. स क र D a t e o f H e a r i n g 05/05/2022 !"# क र /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t 23/05/2022 ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JM: The appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) vide Appeal No. CIT(A), Vadodara- 1/10413/2018-19 dated 15.09.2021 arising in the penalty order dated 12.02.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY. 2015-16. ITA No. 261/Ahd/2021 [Malataj Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2015-16 - 2 - 2. The ground of appeal raised by assessee reads as under: “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts of the case by confirming penalty of Rs.2,00,450/- levied by the learned Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2,00,450/- 2. Your Appellant, therefore, prays to delete the penalty of Rs.2,00,450/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the learned Assessing Officer. ------ 3. Your Appellant prays to reserve the right to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal. Total Tax Effect 2,00,450/-“ 3. The brief facts of the case are that return of income declaring taxable income at Rs.Nil filed on 08.02.2016 after claiming deduction 80P(2)(a) of the Act of Rs.15,84,525/-. After verification, AO disallowed the claim to the extent of Rs.6,58,707/- and made addition on which penalty imposed. 4. The concealment notice of Section 274 of the Act was issued on 16.01.2019. The explanation letter dated 29.01.2019 was prepared for submission. Thereafter, the AO was on leave and the Clerk not accepted the submission upon telephone talk. Without considering the submission, AO passed the order. 5. Thereafter, assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the learned CIT(A). Before learned CIT(A), it was contended by the assessee that matter was decided ex parte by the learned AO and even before the learned CIT(A), assessee could not file his submission. Therefore, in such facts and circumstances, we set aside this matter back to the file of the learned AO subject to the condition that a penalty of Rs.1000/- shall be imposed on the assessee as it has wasted precious time of the Revenue ITA No. 261/Ahd/2021 [Malataj Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2015-16 - 3 - authority and did not file any relevant details in support of its case and same to be deposited with the department within 60 days from the receipt of this order. Thereafter, the AO shall decide the matter after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass the order as per law. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Sd/- Sd/- ( WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACC OUNTANT MEMB ER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 23/05/2022 True Copy S.K.SINHA ेश ! " #े" / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- $. र / Revenue 2. आ दक / Assessee '. सं(ं)* आयकर आय + / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय + - अपील / CIT (A) .. / 0 1ीय 2 2 )*3 आयकर अपील य अ)*कर#3 अ45द ( द / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. 1 78 9 ल / Guard file. By order/आद श स 3 उप/स4 यक पं ीक र आयकर अपील य अ)*कर#3 अ45द ( द । This Order pronounced in Open Court on 23/05/2022