SUPER SONIC IMPEX,SURAT V. .NEAC, DELHI

ITA 847/SRT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Super Sonic Impex, which appealed against the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271AAC(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19. The penalty was based on an addition of Rs.42,65,901 sustained by the CIT(A) after partially deleting a larger addition. The Tribunal had previously set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for verification and a speaking order. Given this restoration, the Tribunal found that the penalty was no longer applicable, leading to the quashing of the CIT(A)'s order on the penalty.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26803 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 09-08-2024
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No.416/SRT/2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 69C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.847/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Super Sonic Impex, Plot No.5/6, No. C-10, S. K. Industrial Estate – 2, Udhna Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007, Gujarat Vs. The NeAC, Delhi èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ABFFS8939Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Mehul Shah, CA Respondent by Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/12/2024 Date of Pronouncement 09/12/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanates from the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 13.06.2024 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in partly confirming the action of Assessing Officer by sustaining the levy of penalty of Rs.3,29,541/- out of total penalty of Rs.8,19,673/- u/s 271AAC(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. It is therefore prayed that the above penalty levied by the assessing officer and partially confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted. 2 ITA No.847/SRT/2024/AY.2018-19 Super Sonic Impex 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Facts of the case in brief are that assessee filed its return of income on 28.09.2019, declaring total income of Rs.12,33,640/-. After hearing the assessee, order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed on 24.04.2021 by adding Rs.1,09,32,730/-. In the appeal, the CIT(A) deleted addition of Rs.63,44,669/- and sustain addition of Rs.42,65,901/- made u/s 69C of the Act. The Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) passed penalty order u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act on 18.01.2022 by levying penalty on the entire addition of Rs.1,06,10,561/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before CIT(A) who directed AO to re-compute the penalty by reducing the relief granted by CIT(A) of Rs.62,59,296/-. In other words, he sustained levy of penalty on addition of Rs.42,65,901/. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that the ITAT has decided the quantum appeal in ITA No.416/SRT/2024, dated 27.11.2024. The ITAT in para 7 of the order has set aside the order of CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the file of AO for verification of the impugned issue and passed a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He, therefore, requested to delete the penalty. 5. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue relied on the order of CIT(A). 3 ITA No.847/SRT/2024/AY.2018-19 Super Sonic Impex 6. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. We find that the quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No.416/SRT/2024 was decided vide order dated 27.11.2024 where the ITAT set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of AO for verification of the impugned issue and to pass a speaking order after hearing the assessee. Since the addition made in the assessment order, on the basis of which penalty was levied, has been restored to the file of AO for fresh adjudication, there remains no basis at all for levying the penalty. Hence, the penalty order does not survive, and the order of CIT(A) is quashed. We make it clear that the AO may initiate proceedings u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act during the fresh remand proceedings before him if required conditions are fulfilled. In the result, the ground is allowed for statistical purpose. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order is pronounced in the open court on 09/12/2024. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surat Ǒदनांक/ Date: 09/12/2024 SAMANTA Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat "