Vijay Pandurang Yadhav, Kolhapur V. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Rang -2, Kolhapur

ITA 416/PUN/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0442 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 05-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 271D; 250; 43

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “बी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.416/PUN/2021 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Vijay Pandurang Jadhav, Khotwadi, Road, Tardal, Hatkanangle, Kolhapur-416121 PAN : AINPJ3671M .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range – 2, Kolhapur ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue by : Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 06-10-2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 18-10-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JM : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi’s order dated 01-08- 2021, passed in case No. ITBA/NFAC/250/2021-22/1034563601(1), in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2 ITA No.416/PUN/2021, A.Y. 2015-16 2. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in imposing section 271D penalty of Rs.16,00,000/-, we note that not only the Assessing Officer penalty order dated 14-12-2019 is ex-parte but also he had failed to appear in the lower faceless appellate proceedings. 3. Learned counsel sought to buttress the point the assessee’s non- appearance in both the lower proceedings as attributable to Covid-19 pandemic outbreak at its initial stage followed by various lockdown in the years 2000 and 2021. He has further placed on record the assessee’s detailed paper book running into 43 pages that there are no cash loans in violation of section 269SS in the impugned assessment years. Faced with this situation, we deem it proper to restore the assessee’s sole substantive grievance back to the Assessing Officer for this afresh adjudication as per law. The Revenue’s vehemently arguments supporting the impugned penalty are rejected to this limited extent. Ordered accordingly. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 18 th October, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (G.D. Padmahshali) (S.S. Godara ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनाांक / Dated : 18 th October, 2022. रदव 3 ITA No.416/PUN/2021, A.Y. 2015-16 आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 4. The CIT concerned. 5. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “बी” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. //सत्यादपत प्रदत// True Copy// आिेशानुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ दनजी सदचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune