MARUT PAPER PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, KANPUR, KANPUR

ITA 393/LKW/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Marut Paper Products Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting a penalty of Rs. 47,21,400 levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The appellant argued that the CIT(A)'s order was not a speaking order on merits and was dismissed in limine for want of prosecution. The Departmental Representative supported the penalty but left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s order to be non-compliant with Section 250(6) as it was not a speaking order and thus set it aside, restoring the matter back to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive review.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826696 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: YASH BHADOLA
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW ‘A’ BENCH LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.393/LKW/2023 Assessment year:2016-17 Marut Paper Products Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.314, 1st Floor Deepshikha Building, Rajendra Place, New Delhi - 110008 PAN: AAFCM 7523G Vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 1, Kanpur (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER: ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.393/Lkw/2023 has been filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 against impugned appellate order dated 03/10/2023 (Appeal No. CIT(A)-IV/KNP/10788/2015-16 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. In this case, penalty levied by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) amounting to Rs.47,21,400/- was confirmed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 03.10.2023. Appellant by Shri Yash Bhadola, Advocate Respondent by Shri Amit Kumar, Addl. CIT, D.R. Printed from counselvise.com 2 3. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 03.10.2023 of learned CIT(A). 4. At the time of hearing, learned Authorized counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned appellate order passed by learned CIT(A) is not speaking order on merits. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine for want of prosecution without going into the merits of the case. In view of foregoing, he submitted that the dispute regarding levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act should be restored back to the file of learned CIT(A) with a direction to pass denovo appellate order, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 5. The learned Departmental Representative (DR) relied on the penalty order passed by the learned AO and on the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A), but left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. 6. After perusing the materials on record and after hearing of both sides, we find that impugned order passed by learned CIT(A) is not a speaking order on the merits of the case. Instead, he has passed a Printed from counselvise.com 3 summary order dismissing the assessee’s appeal in limine without going in to the merits of the case. This is in violation of requirements described u/s. 250(6) of the Act. 7. In view of the foregoing, the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the dispute regarding levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is restored back to the learned CIT(A) with a direction to poass denovo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and duly adhering to requirements of passing a speaking order on merits which contained in Section 250(6) of the Act. All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with law with aforesaid directions and order. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 05/01/2026) Sd/. Sd/. (KUL BHARAT) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Vice President Accountant Member Dated:05/01/2026 Aks/- Printed from counselvise.com 4 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., Printed from counselvise.com "