2019 (5) TMI 293 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - quantum additions have been set aside to the file of AO - HELD THAT - In so far as the quantum additions in both these appeals are concerned for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 2019 (4) TMI 857 - ITAT PUNE , the Pune Bench of the Tribunal has remitted the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer. DR fairly submitted that since quantum addition has been remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication, similarly penalty issue should also be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer in the interest of justice. We set aside the orders of the CIT(Appeals) for both the years and remit the matters back to the file of AO to adjudicate in view of the quantum matter already in front of him as per law and after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against deletion of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09.

Analysis:

1. Background:
- Two appeals by the Revenue from orders by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 were brought before the ITAT Pune.

2. Grievance of the Revenue:
- The core issue in both appeals was the deletion of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Ld. CIT(Appeals).

3. Arguments and Decision:
- During the hearing, the Ld. DR informed the Bench that the quantum additions, leading to the penalty imposition, had been set aside to the Assessing Officer for reassessment.
- The Ld. DR acknowledged the need for the penalty issue to be reconsidered in light of the quantum additions being reassessed.
- After reviewing the case records and considering the arguments, the ITAT Pune decided to set aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for both years.
- The matters were remitted back to the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication, aligning with the reassessment of the quantum matter, and ensuring the assessee is given a fair opportunity to present their case.

4. Outcome:
- As a result, the appeals of the Revenue were allowed for statistical purposes, indicating a procedural victory rather than a substantive decision on the penalty issue.

5. Conclusion:
- The ITAT Pune's judgment focused on the interconnection between quantum additions and penalty imposition, emphasizing the need for coherence in the assessment process and the application of natural justice principles. The decision to remit the matters back to the Assessing Officer reflects a commitment to fair and thorough evaluation in line with legal requirements.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, and the decision rendered by the ITAT Pune, providing a detailed understanding of the legal proceedings and the rationale behind the judgment.