2018 (5) TMI 1431 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - Held that - The learned CIT(A) is directed to consider the additional ground and pass appropriate order on the ground after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard - deciding only part of the appeal leads to multiplication of proceedings at different levels and forums which is not desirable - appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. Additional ground raised regarding the validity of the penalty notice. Admissibility of the additional ground raised for consideration. Decision to remit the additional ground to the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals for review. Consideration of all issues in the appeal instead of deciding piecemeal. Outcome of the appeals and directions provided.

Analysis:

The appeals were filed by the assessee against the imposition of penalties under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The assessee also raised a common additional ground challenging the validity of the penalty notice issued under Section 274. The Tribunal considered the additional ground raised by the assessee, which was not previously raised before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals or the Assessing Officer during the penalty proceedings. The Tribunal, in line with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC, admitted the additional ground for consideration.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal noted that the additional ground raised by the assessee required reference to the original records and was crucial to the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remit the additional ground to the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals for further review. The Commissioner was directed to consider the additional ground and pass an appropriate order after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard.

The Tribunal emphasized the importance of deciding all issues in an appeal instead of addressing them piecemeal. Citing the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Ramdas Pharmacy, the Tribunal highlighted that resolving all issues at once prevents the multiplication of proceedings across different levels and forums. After the Commissioner's order is complete following the remittance of the additional ground, the parties would be free to raise further grounds in the appeal if necessary.

Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. The order was pronounced in the open court on 2nd May 2018, marking the conclusion of the proceedings.