SHRI ABHIJIT UTTAMRAO DESHMUKH,BEED V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

ITA 1666/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Abhijit Uttamrao Deshmukh, the appellant, who contested a penalty of Rs.83,04,375 levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer. This penalty was based on the non-compliance with notices regarding the reassessment of income, which included an amount of Rs.2.5 crores from the sale of land. The reassessment was initiated following information that the said amount was written off by the purchasing company. The appellant did not respond to the notices under sections 148 and 142(1), leading to a penalty assessment. The CIT(A) upheld the penalty, prompting the appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal's decision to remand the penalty issue back to the CIT(A) was influenced by the ongoing quantum appeal concerning the reassessed income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 32431 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATEEK JHA
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1666/PUN/2024 Assessment year : 2011-12 Shri Abhijit Uttamrao Deshmukh Vithal Niwas, Ganesh Par Road, Parli Vaijanath, Beed – 431505 Vs. ACIT, Circle – 3, Aurangabad PAN: AGWPD1032B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Prateek Jha Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 05-03-2025 Date of pronouncement : 20-03-2025 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03.07.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2011-12. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the penalty of Rs.83,04,375/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. Facts of the case in brief, are that the assessee is an individual. On the basis of information received from Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.) that the assessee has received an amount of Rs.2.5 crores in financial year 2010-11 against sale of land to Hi-tech Engineering Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Baramati and the said 2 ITA No.1666/PUN/2024 amount has been written off by Hi-tech Engineering Pvt. Ltd. in their balance sheet, the case of the assessee was reopened as per the provisions of section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. The assessee had neither filed the original return nor filed any return in response to the notice u/s 148. The notice issued u/s 142(1) also remains un-complied with. The Assessing Officer, therefore, completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act determining total income of the assessee at Rs.6,17,50,440/- by adding the amount of Rs.2.5 crores to the total income of the assessee. 4. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC which was pending. In the meantime, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. In absence of any compliance from the side of the assessee to the notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.83,04,375/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being the minimum penalty leviable. 5. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC confirmed the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. We find in the instant case the quantum appeal is pending before the Ld. CIT(A) and in the meantime, 3 ITA No.1666/PUN/2024 the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied penalty of Rs.83,04,375/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Since the quantum appeal is still pending before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case, we deem it proper to restore the issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to decide the penalty appeal after the quantum appeal is decided. Needless to say, he shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to participate in the appellate proceedings on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 20th March, 2025 GCVSR 4 ITA No.1666/PUN/2024 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 06.03.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 17.03.2025 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order "