आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी महावीर ͧसंह, उपाÚय¢ एवं डॉ एम एल मीना, लेखा सदèय के सम¢ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND Dr. M.L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 590/CHNY/2020 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. K. Hajira Banu, No.28A, Afsar Textiles, 1 st Main Road, Subramaniyapuram, Madurai – 625 011. PAN: ADNPH 1972N v. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : None ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 14.03.2022 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 15.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER BENCH: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai in ITA No.047/2017-18 dated 30.01.2020. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai for the assessment year 2014-15 u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) vide order dated 29.12.2016. The impugned 2 I.T.A. No.590/Chny/2020 penalty was levied by the ITO, Non-Corporate Ward 2(2), Madurai vide his order dated 28.06.2017 u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the levy of penalty by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act without affording sufficient opportunity in violation of principles of natural justice and passing ex-parte order. 3. None is present from assessee’s side however Revenue is represented by ld. Senior DR, Shri Sajit Kumar. 4. We have gone through the order of CIT(A) and noticed that the CIT(A) has posted the appeal for hearing on various dates during 2019 & 2020. Finally the CIT(A) passed order on 30.01.2020 but it is noticed that the CIT(A) simply confirmed the action of AO by quoting the Explanation (1) to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and also noted that since the assessee failed to come forward to produce documentary evidence to substantiate the claims made, hence he confirmed the penalty. In our view, the order of CIT(A) is a non-speaking order on the issues because he has not discussed the creditors rather he has discussed what happened during assessment proceedings and not discussed what happened during penalty proceedings. In our view, as the assessee could not represent before CIT(A), one more chance be 3 I.T.A. No.590/Chny/2020 provided to assessee to represent her case. To this, the ld.Senior DR stated that the CIT(A) has passed order on merits but when pointed out that the CIT(A) has simply confirmed the order of AO levying penalty, he could not show us how the CIT(A) has dealt with the issue on merits, as regards to levy of penalty. In term of these, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to avail this opportunity otherwise the CIT(A) will again constraint to pass ex-parte order. Accordingly, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the court on 15 th March, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- (डॉ एम एल मीना) (Dr. M.L. MEENA) लेखा सद᭭य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 15 th March, 2022 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.