W G STEEL INDUSTRIES ,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 28(3)(5), NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 1699/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves W.G. Steel Industries appealing against the penalty orders imposed by the Income Tax Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The penalties were upheld by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The appeals were initially filed with a delay of 375 days, which was condoned by the tribunal as the Departmental Representative did not object. The main contention in the appeals was the penalties amounting to Rs. 2,44,480 for A.Y. 2010-11 and Rs. 6,23,420 for A.Y. 2011-12, which were 100% of the tax allegedly sought to be evaded. The tribunal noted that the quantum assessments for the same years were set aside by a Coordinate Bench and remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Consequently, the tribunal decided to remand the penalty appeals as well, directing a de novo adjudication in light of the quantum proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633168 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"1 ITAs1697 & 1699/Mum/2025 W.G. Steel Industries IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MISS PADMAVATHY. S(ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.1697/Mum/2025 - A.Y. 2010-11 I.T.A. No.1699/Mum/2025 - A.Y. 2011-12 W G Steel Industries Plot No.18, Krishna Kunj, Sector-28, Vashi, Navi MumbAI-400 703 PAN: AAAFW9987E vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 28(3)(5), Mumbai Income-tax Office, Vashi Railway Station Building Vashi, Navi Mumbai- 400 703 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Satish Jain Department represented by Shri Swapnil Choudhary – Sr AR Date of hearing 09-06-2025 Date of pronouncement 12-06-2025 O R D E R PER: ANIKESH BANERJEE (JM): Both the appeals of the assessee were filed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, *for brevity, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’+passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961,(in short, ‘the Act’) for A.Ys 2010- 11 & 2011-12, date of order 01/12/2023. The impugned orders emanated from the orders of the Ld.Income-tax Officer, Ward 28(3)(5), Mumbai[for brevity, 2 ITAs1697 & 1699/Mum/2025 W.G. Steel Industries ‘Ld.AO’+ passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, date of order 12/08/2016 for both the orders. 2. Both appeals were filed with a delay of 375 days. The assessee has explained the cause of delay by submitting a duly sworn affidavit dated 28/04/2025. Since the Ld. DR has not raised any objection to the condonation of delay, we hereby condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Both appeals are directed against the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A), wherein the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was upheld — amounting to Rs. 2,44,480/- for A.Y. 2010-11 and Rs. 6,23,420/- for A.Y. 2011-12, being 100% of the tax allegedly sought to be evaded. During the course of the hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that for both assessment years, the quantum appeals had been duly contested before the ITAT, Mumbai Bench. The Coordinate Bench, vide orders dated 28/04/2025 in ITA No. 1696/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2010-11 and ITA No. 1698/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2011-12, set aside the quantum assessments to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In view of the above, and considering the submissions of the Ld. AR, we deem it appropriate to remand the present appeals, pertaining to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, to be decided afresh in light of the outcome of the quantum proceedings. The Ld. DR has not raised any objection to the prayer of the Ld. AR. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case so as not to prejudice the outcome of the proceedings.Needless to say, the assessee shall be 3 ITAs1697 & 1699/Mum/2025 W.G. Steel Industries afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the remanded proceedings and, in turn, is expected to extend full cooperation for expeditious disposal of the appeal. 4. In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITAs No.1697 & 1699/Mum/2025are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 12/06/2025. Sd/- sd/- (MISS PADMAVATHY. S) ( ANIKESH BANERJEE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dt : 12th June, 2025 Pavanan प्रतितितिअग्रेतििCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अिीिार्थी/The Appellant , 2. प्रतिवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयुक्त CIT 4. तवभागीयप्रतितिति, आय.अिी.अति., मुबंई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्डफाइि/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// Asstt.Registrar / Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Mumbai 4 ITAs1697 & 1699/Mum/2025 W.G. Steel Industries "